Minutes Ordinary Council Meeting

MINUTES

ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

COUNCIL CHAMBERS 241 ROKEBY ROAD, SUBIACO

TUESDAY 22 SEPTEMBER 2020

COMMENCEMENT: 5:33PM CLOSURE: 9.28PM

No responsibility whatsoever is implied or accepted by the City for any act, omission or statement or intimation occurring during Ordinary Council Meetings.

The City disclaims any liability for any loss whatsoever and howsoever caused arising out of reliance by any person or legal entity on any such act, omission or statement or intimation occurring during an Ordinary Council Meeting.

Any person or legal entity who acts or fails to act in reliance upon any statement, act or omission made in an Ordinary Council Meeting does so at that person’s or legal entity’s own risk.

In particular and without derogating in any way from the broad disclaimer above, in any discussion regarding any planning application or application for a licence, any statement or intimation of approval made by any member or officer of the City during the course of any meeting is not intended to be and is not taken as notice of approval from the City.

The City of Subiaco wishes to advise that any plans or documents contained within this agenda may be subject to copyright law provisions (Copyright Act 1968, as amended) and that the express permission of the copyright owner(s) should be sought prior to their reproduction.

Members of the public should note that no action should be taken on any item discussed at an Ordinary Council Meeting prior to written advice on the resolution of Council being received.

Agendas and Minutes are available on the City’s website www.subiaco.wa.gov.au CONTENTS

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS ...... 1

2. ATTENDANCE / APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE ...... 1

3. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST ...... 2

4. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE ...... 3

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME ...... 3

6. PUBLIC STATEMENT TIME ...... 8

7. PETITIONS AND APPROVED DEPUTATIONS ...... 8

8. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS ...... 8

8.1 Special Council Meeting – 28 July 2020 ...... 8

8.2 Ordinary Council Meeting – 18 August 2020 ...... 8

8.3 Special Council Meeting – 20 August 2020 ...... 9

8.4 Special Council Meeting – 8 September 2020 ...... 9

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PRESIDING MEMBER ...... 9

10. OFFICER REPORTS ...... 10

C1 Subi East Draft Master Plan DevelopmentWA Referral* ...... 10

C2 Endorsement of Draft Waste Plan 2020-2025* ...... 29

C3 Onslow Park Tennis Club – Proposal* ...... 34

C4 Review of Wards and Councillor Representation* ...... 48

C5 Financial Statements and Reports for the Month Ending 31 July 2020* ...... 58

C6 Matters for Information* ...... 63

11. ELECTED MEMBERS’ MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN ...... 65

11.1 Swings and Hoops ...... 65 11.2 Open Sport Space at Subi Oval ...... 67

12. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE APPROVED BY THE PERSON PRESIDING OR BY A DECISION OF THE MEETING ...... 70

13. MEETING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC ...... 70

13.1 Commercial Property Matter – Confidential* ...... 70

14. CLOSURE OF MEETING ...... 70

*Separate attachments 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

1. DECLARATION OF OPENING / ANNOUNCEMENT OF VISITORS

The Presiding Member declared the Ordinary Council Meeting of the 22 September 2020 held in Council Chambers at the City of Subiaco open at 5.33pm. The Presiding Member welcomed Councillors, Staff, the media and Members of the Community.

The Presiding Member acknowledged the Whadjuk Noongar people as the traditional custodians of the area and recognised their cultural connection to the land and waterways of Subiaco, and their continuing contribution to our City.

The Presiding Member informed the public that the Meeting was being live-streamed and recorded via the City’s website.

2. ATTENDANCE / APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Elected Members Present Mayor Penny Taylor (Presiding Member) Cr Angela Hamersley Central Ward Cr Lynette Jennings Central Ward Cr David McMullen South Ward Cr Rick Powell South Ward Cr Stephanie Stroud North Ward Cr Derek Nash North Ward Cr Rosemarie de Vries North Ward Cr Matt Davis East Ward Cr Murray Rowe East Ward Cr Blake Phelan East Ward

Staff Members Present Cliff Frewing A/Chief Executive Officer Scott Hawkins Director Corporate Services Marion Morton Director Community and Development Services Gray Stead Manager Operations and Environment Services Alex Petrovski Manager Planning Services Anthony Denholm Coordinator Statutory Planning Services Bianca Jones Manager Finance & Governance Services Joel Guest Manager Commercial Services and Property Anthea Astone Governance Support Officer Esther Gledhill Public Liaison

Apologies Cr Jodi Mansfield Central Ward

Leave of Absence Nil

Observers 12 members of the public 1 media

CITY OF SUBIACO 1 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Hamersley / Seconded Cr de Vries That Cr David McMullen be granted a leave of absence for the period 1 October 2020 to 31 October 2020 inclusive. CARRIED 11/0 5.35pm

COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Rowe / Seconded Cr Phelan That Cr Rosemarie de Vries be granted a leave of absence for the period 1 December 2020 to 31 December 2020 inclusive. CARRIED 11/0 5.35pm

3. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST

Cr Angela Hamersley declared a FINANCIAL and PROXIMITY interest in item C1 pursuant to Section 5.60A and 5.60B of the Local Government Act 1995. The nature of the interest is:

“On 17 September 2020 it was alleged by a person that I have a proximity interest pursuant to s 5.60B of the Local Government Act 1995 and that I may have a financial interest pursuant to s 5.60A that preclude me from participating in item C1. Having considered the content of the LGA, including section 5.63(1)(a), and the nature of the redevelopment area that is the subject of C 1 and the process presently being undertaken by Development WA, I do not agree that I am precluded from participating in item C1. However, given the political climate that I perceive to exist in Subiaco and Western Australia I consider it to be too risky for me to participate in item C1 in the face of the allegations. Accordingly, the type of interests I am declaring, without admission, are Proximity pursuant to s 5.60B of the Local Government Act 1995 and Financial pursuant to s 5.60A of the Local Government Act 1995. The reason for my declaration is that I am the owner of a residential property at 3/183 Roberts Road, Subiaco.”

Cr Angela Hamersley declared an IMPARTIALITY interest in item C3 pursuant to Regulation 11 of the Local Government (Rules of Conduct) Regulations 2007. The nature of the interest is:

“I have a brother who is a member of the Onslow Park Tennis Club.”

Cr Lynette Jennings declared a FINANCIAL and IMPARTIALITY interest in item C1 pursuant to Section 5.60A of the Local Government Act 1995 and Regulation 11 of the Local Government (Rules of Conduct) Regulations 2007. The nature of the interest is:

“I own property at 36 Subiaco Road, Subiaco and as a beneficiary under the will of my late mother, have an interest in the property at 36A Subiaco Road, Subiaco which property forms part of her estate and any Council decision in respect of item C1 may possibly have an effect on the value of my property.”

Cr Lynette Jennings declared a PROXMITY interest in item C1 pursuant to Section 5.60B of the Local Government Act 1995. The nature of the interest is:

CITY OF SUBIACO 2 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

“I own a property at 36 Subiaco Road, Subiaco and as a beneficiary under the will of my late mother, have an interest in the property at 36A Subiaco Road, Subiaco which property forms part of her estate. A Council decision in respect of item C1 may relate to the extended meaning of ‘development’ being for the management or maintenance of land, being in the railway neighbourhood of the Subi East Draft Master Plan, specifically land in the railway reserve that is behind and has a common boundary with the rear boundaries of those properties.”

4. RESPONSE TO PREVIOUS PUBLIC QUESTIONS TAKEN ON NOTICE

Nil

5. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

The A/Chief Executive Officer made the following statement in regards to public attendance at the meeting:

“The conditions of entry and behaviour to this Council Meeting are contained in a statement displayed on the door on entry to the Council Chamber. Please ensure you are familiar with the conditions so that the Meeting can be conducted at an appropriate standard.”

Peter McDonald, 236 Onslow Road, Shenton Park asked the following question:

Question 1 My question relates to former Councillor Julie Matheson’s claim upon the City arising from the outcome of the appeal to the SAT from the Standards Panel decision in her case.

I advise I have written authority from Ms Matheson to ask this question on her behalf.

On 17 April 2018 Council adopted its Litigation Policy – policy 2.11 of the Policy Manual. The Policy applies to City employees and representatives and requires them to deal with claims promptly.

After Ms Matheson won her appeal in the case of Matheson and Local Government Standards Panel [2020] WASAT 26, she notified the CEO and the City’s insurance agent LGIS that she intended to made a claim upon the City. On 8 May 2020 the CEO emailed Ms Matheson seeking the details of the claim. On 25 May 2020 Ms Matheson wrote to the CEO providing the details of her claim.

From 25 May through until 19 August 2020 (a period of 86 days) Ms Matheson did not hear back or receive any communication from any of the CEO, LGIS or the City’s insurers Chubb Insurance, to respond to or acknowledge receipt of her claim.

On 20 August 2020 LGIS advised Ms Matheson the claim would be responded to under the City’s management liability insurance policy. To date Ms Matheson has received no further correspondence from any of the CEO, LGIS or Chubb in relation to her claim.

Does the CEO consider Ms Matheson’s claim has been dealt with promptly and in compliance with Policy 2.11 and the City’s obligation under the common law to conduct itself as a model litigant?

CITY OF SUBIACO 3 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The Director Corporate Services provided the following response:

Question 1 The city’s Litigation Policy (2.11) relates to “civil claims and civil litigation involving the City.” As Mr McDonald has correctly stated, the SAT case was between “Matheson and Local Government Standards Panel” and the City of Subiaco was not a litigant, therefore Policy 2.11 does not apply.

The response provided to Ms Matheson’s public question outlined at the Ordinary Council Meeting on 18 August 2020 stated that the City has been notified by the City’s insurers that they have been communicating directly with Ms Matheson on a number of occasions regarding her claim during this period. We understand that the City’s insurers are waiting on a response from Ms Matheson in relation to their most recent correspondence.

As this claim has been lodged with the City’s insurers the City of Subiaco cannot provide further comment, including the timeframe for the insurers to make a deliberation.

Andrew Devitt, 21 Finlayson Street, Subiaco asked the following questions:

Question 1 The “Verge Policy Management Guidelines Updated: January 2012” states under non- compliant use that “The construction/installation of tree houses and other play structures/equipment within the verge is not considered appropriate due to safety issues." What are these safety issues and specifically what safety issue does a toddler’s swing pose?

Question 2 Are these concerns related to any form of public liability insurance matters and, if so, what historical claims have been made against this insurance in the last two years, specifically related to children's play equipment on verges?

The Manager Operations and Environment Services provided the following response:

Question 1 Safety issues are not only limited to the type of play structure installed but also on how it attaches to the tree, the damage that may be caused by this attachment and the safety of the branch or health of the tree.

Question 2 The City is not aware of any claims made in relation to play equipment on verges during this period.

Helen Leeder, 3 Cuthbert Street, Shenton Park asked the following question:

Question 1 My question refers to responses previously given by the Director of Corporate Services concerning the ‘annotation' to the minutes of the 14th August 2018 OCM (the annotation occurring some time in January 2019). I thank him for his patience.

CITY OF SUBIACO 4 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Will he now advise this Council and Ratepayers of when he advised SAT via the Department of Local Government and the Solicitor General of the ‘annotation’ to the minutes?

The Director Corporate Services provided the following response:

Question 1 The City has never been a party to a State Administrative Tribunal regarding an annotation of minutes and as a consequence there was no reason to provide any advice. As previously provided the annotation of the minutes for an Ordinary Council Meeting held over 2 years ago was made to accurately reflect the administrative error.

Mary McFarland, 11 Francis Street, Subiaco asked the following questions:

Question 1 There has been much talk about reducing red tape by local and state governments. However, it is government and public sector organisations that operate with a ‘silo’ or ‘blinkered’ mentality that prevent the sharing of ideas, knowledge and information which result in major failures of efficiency and competence, and the cover up of blunders – all of which work against ratepayer and taxpayers. In view of this I would like to know if anyone from the City of Subiaco has formally raised the state government’s requirement for 8 hectares of land for Bob Hawke College with the Department of Planning and/or Department of Education? If not, could a detailed explanation please be provided. If so, could full details please be provided (e.g. when, by whom, what was asked)?

Question 2 In Attachment 1 to Item C1 of tonight’s Agenda, CoS planning staff have stated that the LPS identifies Subi East as a targeted growth area of 2,900 new homes – a figure that they say may well be exceeded if the railway line is capped and developed at a future date. In view of these figures for current, let alone possible future, new dwellings has anyone from the CoS formally requested that 4 hectares of land in the Subi East precinct be set aside for at least one new government primary school as required by Draft Operational Policy 2.4 Planning for School Sites August 2020 – Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage and the Western Australian Planning Commission, and Liveable Neighbourhoods Draft 2015 – Department of Planning and the Western Australian Planning Commission? If not, could a detailed explanation please be provided. If so, could full details please be provided (e.g. when, by whom, what was asked?)

The Manager Planning Services provided the following response:

Question 1 The design and development of public schools is a State Government matter. City officers understand that the land area for Bob Hawke College is reduced from that normally provided for public schools due to its development as an inner city college.

Question 2 The City’s draft Local Planning Strategy and draft Local Planning Scheme No. 5 were provided to the Department of Education during public consultation. The Department of Education provided a submission recommending that the City work with the Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority to identify land within the Subi East area to meet long term needs for additional early childhood learning facilities.

CITY OF SUBIACO 5 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The Department of Education is a key stakeholder in the planning for Subiaco East and is responsible for considering demand for public schools.

Funding for capping the railway line was not allocated as part of the business case for Subiaco East.

Fleur Hogan, 21 Finlayson Street, Subiaco asked the following questions:

Question 1 Council staff have advised in the agenda that "The Activities and Thoroughfares Local Law 2014 does not allow any discretion" yet the City of Vincent achieved exactly that in 2018 by amending their verge policy to allow for a more common sense approach to these matters. Given all local governments essentially operate in the same legislative environment, with the same legal obligations, if it was possible at City of Vincent, how is it not possible at City of Subiaco? Have council staff investigated the actions of other local councils to explore what can be achieved or at a minimum undertaken any serious community consultation in this matter?

Question 2 Can council advise how a revised policy would contravene the Local Law. Which specific clause in the” Activities and Thoroughfares Local Law 2014" prohibits the attachment of a swing to a tree? There appears to be nothings specific in clause 2.1 – General Prohibitions (with the exception of 2.1.f - play or participate in any game or sport so as to cause danger to any person or thing or impede the movement of vehicles or persons on a thoroughfare; and if it is this clause, how is the perceived ‘danger’ assessed?

The Manager Operations and Environment Services provided the following response:

Question 1 To allow the discretion mentioned in your question, the City of Vincent amended their Local Law which allowed their Street Tree Policy to be reviewed specifically to allow these kinds of attachments to a street tree. For the City to be able to afford the same levels of discretion, the City’s Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law would need to be amended.

Question 2 The relevant clause is 2.1 f of the Local Law. Safety issues are not only limited to the type of play structure installed but also on how it attaches to the tree, the damage that may be caused by this attachment and the safety of the branch or health of the tree.

David Stewart, 159 Nicholson Road, Shenton Park asked the following questions:

Question 1 For the guidance of ratepayers, what decisions have been made within the City of Subiaco at an operation level about the activities of ratepayers to install temporary and transportable playground equipment on street verges within the City’s boundaries?

Question 2 Since 1 January 2020, how many fines and how many warnings have been issued by City officials to ratepayers about the installation by ratepayers of temporary and transportable playground equipment on street verges?

CITY OF SUBIACO 6 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The Manager Operations and Environment Services provided the following response:

Question 1 Temporary and transportable playground equipment on street verges within the City’s boundaries is currently not permitted as per the City’s Activities and Thoroughfares Local Law 2014

Question 2 No fines have been issued and approximately 22 notices to remove equipment have been issued this year.

Sharon Williams, Larundel Road, City Beach asked the following questions:

Question One The council’s adopted decisions of 30 January 2018 and 20 June 2017 both clearly stated the community’s and City’s intent or requirement to include the replacement 1.73ha of active green playing fields in addition to the school/Subiaco Oval via the following points; 1) Special Council Meeting 30 January 2018 “c) Within the development of the Inner City College Stage 2 (planning name for Bob Hawke College) the inclusion of suitable and publically accessible active playing fields space over and above Subiaco Oval” “d) The need for additional active playing fields of approximately 1.73ha to be incorporated into the Master Plan” 2) Special Council Meeting 20 June 2017 “f. Acknowledgement by the State Government of the significant lack of open space in the western suburbs and the negative impact the new school will have on that. Considering that the amount of greenspace provided for active sports is insufficient that should be increased significantly” j. “A requirement for the active green playing fields is over and above the Subiaco Oval playing fields, equal to the 1.73ha of Kitchener Park and deliver the functionality contained in the Kitchener Common Master Plan, be incorporated in the overall design.” Could the responsible City officers or CEO please explain why the 1.73ha of replacement active green playing fields has not been included as one of the recommendations in Attachment No. 1 to align with and meet adopted council decisions? It appears its non-inclusion is contrary to formal council decisions.

Question Two In Attachment No. 1 of the City’s agenda item for C1 the report states “The City understands that Development WA was unable to accommodate the 1.73ha active playing fields in addition to Subiaco Oval…” What proof or evidence does the City have to support their acceptance and use of the word “unable” to rather than a more apt description of unwilling to provide the replacement 1.73ha of active green playing fields? Please provide copies of any proof, rationale or evidence which supports the case that the 1.73ha of replacement active green playing fields cannot fit within the Subi East redevelopment area.

CITY OF SUBIACO 7 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The Manager Planning Services provided the following response:

Question 1 The third paragraph of Attachment 1 states:

The draft Master Plan does not deliver 1.73ha of active playing fields in addition to the Subiaco Oval surface which the City has been advocating for on an ongoing basis. The City’s existing active playing fields have been experiencing capacity issues for some time, and the Subi East Redevelopment project provides a sound opportunity to address this. DevelopmentWA is encouraged to pursue additional opportunities to support the City and incorporate more active playing fields in the Subi East Redevelopment Area. The City reasserts that DevelopmentWA should further investigate this in the context of addressing the City’s detailed comments on the draft Master Plan.

Question 2 On 22 July 2020, DevelopmentWA presented a Community Information Webinar which was open for public view and remains available on the DevelopmentWA website.

During this webinar, DevelopmentWA detailed the considerations regarding public open space which informed the draft master plan, including the allocation of active open space.

Officers understand that this information was also presented to the Community Reference Group.

6. PUBLIC STATEMENT TIME

Andrew Devitt, 21 Finlayson Street, Subiaco read a statement in relation to Item 11.1.

Mary McFarland, 11 Francis Street, Subiaco read a statement in relation to Item C1.

James Edwards, 13 Cuthbert Street, Subiaco read a statement in relation to Item C3.

Paul Clements, 102 Barker Road, Subiaco read a statement in relation to Item C1.

7. PETITIONS AND APPROVED DEPUTATIONS

Nil

8. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETINGS

8.1 Special Council Meeting – 28 July 2020 That the Minutes of the City of Subiaco Special Council Meeting held on Tuesday 28 July 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record. LAPSED FOR WANT OF A MOVER

8.2 Ordinary Council Meeting – 18 August 2020 That the Minutes of the City of Subiaco Ordinary Council Meeting held on Tuesday 18 August 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record. LAPSED FOR WANT OF A MOVER

CITY OF SUBIACO 8 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

8.3 Special Council Meeting – 20 August 2020 That the Minutes of the City of Subiaco Special Council Meeting held on Thursday 20 August 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record. LAPSED FOR WANT OF A MOVER 8.4 Special Council Meeting – 8 September 2020 That the Minutes of the City of Subiaco Special Council Meeting held on Tuesday 8 September 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record. LAPSED FOR WANT OF A MOVER

Note: Elected Members expressed that they weren’t aware the Minutes had been published and therefore did not have the opportunity to view them prior to the meeting.

9. ANNOUNCEMENTS BY THE PRESIDING MEMBER

Firstly I’d like to thank Director Hawkins for his time as Acting CEO, and of course I’d like to welcome our new Acting CEO Cliff Frewing.

Cliff comes to the City of Subiaco with over 40 years experience in local government and it’s a privilege to work alongside such an experienced CEO. Council is really looking forward to continuing the good work of the city with Cliff and as we commence the important process of finding a permanent CEO.

Just a little bit of news before we start our decision-making time as Council, you may have noticed on the way into Chambers a new tree that’s been planted adjacent to the pathway just outside the front.

This is a ginkgo biloba tree planted yesterday on the International Day of Peace to recognise 75 years since the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in Japan.

The tree was grown from seeds originating from one of the few ginkgo trees that survived the bombing in Hiroshima in 1945 and continues to bear fruit annually.

The seeds were gifted to us by the City of Fremantle as part of the international Mayors for Peace group, which was established in 1982 by a former mayor of Hiroshima to promote lasting world peace.

This tree is extremely special and it’s a privilege to plant it in front of chambers to help share the message of peace and friendship.

I hope this tree serves as an important reminder of peace and friendship for our community and visitors for many years to come.

And I hope for us here as elected members it serves to help give us perspective as we make our decisions. We are fortunate that we make decisions in peacetime.

We make decisions to serve our community and our actions and interactions with each other should reflect respect and community service above individual gain and political point scoring.

It is an honour to be elected representatives and we should put serving our community as our highest priority.

CITY OF SUBIACO 9 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

10. OFFICER REPORTS

COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Davis / Seconded Cr Rowe That items C2 and C6 contained in the agenda of the Ordinary Council Meeting of 22 September 2020 be adopted en bloc. CARRIED 11/0 6.21pm

C1 SUBI EAST DRAFT MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENTWA REFERRAL*

Cr Hamersley declared a proximity and financial interest in this item and left the chambers at 6.22pm.

Cr Jennings declared a proximity, financial and impartiality interest in this item and left the chambers at 6.22pm.

REPORT FROM DIRECTOR COMMUNITY AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES Authors: Manager Planning Services, Alexander Petrovski Coordinator Statutory Planning, Anthony Denholm Planning Officer, Oscar Thomson Date: 8 September 2020 File Reference: A/5497 Voting Requirements: Simple - more than half elected members present required to vote in favour

COUNCIL DECISION 1. That DevelopmentWA be advised with respect to the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation that was referred to the City of Subiaco on 14 July 2020, that the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation is supported subject to improvement, as set out in Attachment 1.

2. That the City endorses and supports the concept of a contribution in the form of free title land and free of encumbrance in the overall plan for Subi East.

3. That any further encroachment by the school that is not planned to be within the original bounds of “Kitchener Park” should be subject to distinct consultation with the City and the community and not further reduce the agreed “Green “ link or open space.

4. The City supports improved access and reduced traffic encroachment into the Subiaco school precinct by exploring the possibility of a drop off and pick up zone on Railway Parade and possible installation of a walk bridge over the rail.

5. The City supports the reinstatement of the 97 bus service on weekends to lessen car traffic from Nedlands precincts wishing to visit the improved shopping amenity, playing fields and population growth areas that Subiaco is and will be providing going forward.

CITY OF SUBIACO 10 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

6. That the ‘Future Requirements for Active Open Space Report November 2016’ be attached as part of the submission. CARRIED 8/1 CR PHELAN VOTED AGAINST 7.03pm

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION Moved Cr McMullen / Seconded Mayor Taylor That DevelopmentWA be advised with respect to the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation that was referred to the City of Subiaco on 14 July 2020, that the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation is supported subject to improvement, as set out in Attachment 1.

AMENDMENT Moved Cr Rowe / Seconded Cr Davis The motion be amended to read as follows: 1. That DevelopmentWA be advised with respect to the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation that was referred to the City of Subiaco on 14 July 2020, that the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation is supported subject to improvement, as set out in Attachment 1.

2. That the City endorses and supports the concept of a contribution in the form of free title land and free of encumbrance in the overall plan for Subi East.

Cr Rowe provided the following reasons: 1. This is not an unreasonable consideration in the scope of this area and would allow the City to have a physical and appropriate presence in the precinct given the servicing requirements and scale of activity expected by this significant increase in population. Given free title it would up to Council to discuss any shared use but this should not be a primary condition and the community would need to be consulted in regard to it’s use and any improvement costs. 2. For example the suggested new playing courts that are being considered to be on the West side of the school ( between the school and the Oval ) may breach the original concept of the school being “housed” within Kitchener Park as agreed by the City and the Community. Any encroachment outside of these bounds would represent further loss of access and control by the City and it’s ratepayers due to total or shared use by the school.

CITY OF SUBIACO 11 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

3. Reducing traffic in the immediate Subiaco school zone is a concern of many of our community members. 4. Less traffic and better access is always required and many in the community already suffer from a diminished bus service that operated on weekends to link with working hubs like UWA, QE11 etc and for the general public to weekend shop in Subiaco.

AMENDMENT With the agreement of the mover and seconder, attach the ‘Future Requirements for Active Open Space Report’ as part of the submission (as point 6).

SUBSTANTIVE MOTION 1. That DevelopmentWA be advised with respect to the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation that was referred to the City of Subiaco on 14 July 2020, that the Subi East Draft Master Plan and associated documentation is supported subject to improvement, as set out in Attachment 1.

2. That the City endorses and supports the concept of a contribution in the form of free title land and free of encumbrance in the overall plan for Subi East.

6. That the ‘Future Requirements for Active Open Space Report November 2016’ be attached as part of the submission. CARRIED 8/1 CR PHELAN VOTED AGAINST 7.03pm

Executive Summary This report considers the referral of the Subi East Draft Master Plan and supporting documentation by DevelopmentWA to the City of Subiaco for comment.

The Draft Master Plan is a high-level strategic document created based on an extensive community engagement process and comprehensive technical considerations. It sets out a broad framework to guide future growth and redevelopment of Subi East over the next 20 years and beyond.

11 Urban Framework Strategies feed into the overall Draft Master Plan, and the City’s comments are broadly consolidated under the following four themes:

CITY OF SUBIACO 12 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

1. Planning; a. Consistency with the City of Subiaco Local Planning Strategy (2020); b. Context c. Building height d. Railway Neighbourhood e. Noise considerations f. Interface/design of buildings on Roberts Road g. Court Place opportunity h. Green link i. Wind tunnelling 2. Transport; a. Roads, access, intersections and traffic b. Bicycle infrastructure c. Public transport d. Parking 3. Public Open Space, Public Realm and Place; and a. Tree removal b. Funding maintenance of public open space c. Outdoor recreation and leisure opportunities d. Events e. Activation f. Cultural space g. Interpretation 4. Sustainability and Infrastructure. a. Sustainable development and climate risk assessment

The City has undertaken an extensive review of the documentation internally and with Elected Members. The review focused on the 11 Urban Framework Strategies that form the basis of the draft Master Plan and the supporting technical documentation. The City has assessed the draft Master Plan against its Local Planning Strategy, which was endorsed by the Western Australian Planning Commission on 28 February 2020.

In general, the draft Master Plan is considered to be high quality, well-considered, and fit for purpose at this stage of master planning for the redevelopment process. The City’s review aims to identify issues and opportunities that will improve and future proof the plan.

The draft Master Plan does not make provision for the 1.73ha of active playing fields in addition to the Subiaco Oval surface, which the City has been advocating for on an ongoing basis. The City reasserts that DevelopmentWA should further investigate this in the context of addressing the City’s detailed comments on the draft Master Plan.

There is a range of critical issues that should be addressed in modifications to the documentation, and further issues that can be addressed during later stages of the redevelopment process.

In particular, the draft Master Plan should be modified to align with the City’s Local Planning Strategy. This includes working with the City to set aside land for a cultural space of regional significance, pursuing the two-way configuration for Hay Street and Roberts Road and giving further consideration to the potential offered by capping the railway reservation.

CITY OF SUBIACO 13 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The City recommends a greater level of certainty be provided for building height throughout the precinct, further consideration given to the role of the Railway Neighbourhood and the urban form in the PMH Neighbourhood, among a wide range of more detailed comments.

The City recommends that Council resolve to support the draft Master Plan, subject to improvements as set out in Attachment 1.

Once the draft Master Plan is complete, DevelopmentWA will prepare design guidelines for each precinct, an infrastructure delivery plan and a subdivision plan for each stage of the development.

Introduction This report considers the referral of the Subi East draft Master Plan (draft Master Plan) by DevelopmentWA to the City of Subiaco (the City) for comment, which is provided at Attachment 2. The City’s comment is required by 10 September 2020. An arrangement between DevelopmentWA and the City allows for Council consideration at its ordinary council meeting of the 22 September 2020.

The draft Master Plan will guide and facilitate the largest redevelopment project of its type to occur in Western Australia. The State Government has stated that the project aims to create 2,000+ dwellings and accommodate 4,000+ residents. This will result in approximately $1 billion in private sector investment in the City of Subiaco. The draft Master Plan process is being fast-tracked to support post-COVID economic recovery.

The City has been involved in the process on an ongoing basis through the:  Precinct Liaison Committee (attended by the CEO and Mayor);  Bob Hawke College Working Group;  Communications Working Group;  Master Planning Technical Working Group; and  Traffic and Transport Working Group.

DevelopmentWA briefed Elected Members at a strategic workshop on 11 June 2020 and the 2 July 2020. The City facilitated a strategic workshop with Elected Members on 4 August 2020.

Extensive community engagement by DevelopmentWA has already occurred through community information sessions, surveys of tens of thousands of people and businesses, workshops with industry specialists, technical advisors, key stakeholders and Whadjuk Elders.

Background In January 2017, the Stage Government announced a proposal to relocate the Perth Modern High School into a new building within the Central Business District. The existing school campus was to be converted into a local intake high school to relieve ongoing pressure on other local intake schools.

Following this, there was an alternative proposal to retain Perth Modern as an academically select school and construct a new local intake high school (Bob Hawke College) on Kitchener Park. The State Government decided that the Metropolitan Redevelopment Authority (MRA), now known as DevelopmentWA, would be best placed to deliver the new high school within the promised timeframe.

CITY OF SUBIACO 14 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

At the same time, the Subiaco Oval and the Princess Margaret Hospital were to be decommissioned and redeveloped. Accordingly, a new Redevelopment Area was created to cover Kitchener Park, Subiaco Oval, PMH and all of the land north of Subiaco Road, between Haydn Bunton Drive and Thomas Street. This provided the relevant statutory mechanism to transfer planning authority to DevelopmentWA once the Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme No. 2 (SRS 2) was gazetted on 23 March 2018. The ultimate boundaries of the Subiaco East Redevelopment Area are shown in Figure 1 below.

Figure 1: Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme No. 2 – Scheme Map

During this time, the City was in the process of preparing the City of Subiaco Local Planning Strategy and Local Planning Scheme No. 5 (LPS 5). Following an extensive consultation process, the City’s Local Planning Strategy changed to identify Subi East as a targeted growth area for 2,900 dwellings. Simultaneously, LPS 5 changed to remove large areas of blanket density from around the Daglish and Shenton Park Train Stations.

During February and March 2019, DevelopmentWA sought feedback from the community on the Vision Concept for Subi East which was an early representation of stakeholder and community feedback received throughout 2018.

The demolition of the Subiaco Oval grandstands and associated infrastructure was undertaken in 2019 and completed in time for the opening on the new Bob Hawke College on Kitchener Park in February 2020.

The Stories of Subi project launched on 6 February 2020 at the Subi East Community Hub, located at the Subiaco underground rail station. This partnership between DevelopmentWA and Perth Modern School used Augmented Reality (AR) to bring colourful stores of Subiaco’s history and heritage to life.

During this period, DevelopmentWA sought out volunteers representing different ages and interests from Subiaco and wider Perth communities. Drawn by ballot, the Subi East Community Reference Group provided input into the master planning process and met for the first time on 22 February 2020.

CITY OF SUBIACO 15 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The Community working group workshopped key themes to form the ‘Cultural Context’ of the precinct and identified two potential cultural/heritage themes. The broader community was invited to participate in a survey to finalise the Cultural Concept.

The design phase commenced, and a webinar was hosted on 25 May 2020, which aimed to give the community an opportunity to learn about the process to date and provide insight into the conceptual considerations for each of the precinct neighbourhoods.

The draft Master Plan was published in July 2020 and formally referred to the City of Subiaco on 14 July 2020. DevelopmentWA is seeking public feedback via a survey until 10 September 2020, and a further webinar was held on 22 July 2020.

The City’s comment is due on 10 September 2020; however, an arrangement between DevelopmentWA and the City has allowed for Council consideration of the documentation at its ordinary council meeting of the 22 September 2020.

Detail The City’s review and consideration of the referral documentation focus on the 11 Urban Framework Strategies, which feed into the draft Master Plan itself.

The City has consolidated each of the 11 Urban Framework Strategies into four themes, as shown below in Figure 2. This will ensure the City’s feedback can be addressed holistically across the 11 Urban Framework Strategies and the draft Master Plan, as many are interrelated.

Figure 2: Consolidation of Urban Framework Strategies into Themes

Having undertaken a comprehensive review of all documentation with a focus on the four themes above, the City has prepared a series of recommended improvements to improve to the draft Master Plan, the Urban Framework Strategies and the supporting documentation.

CITY OF SUBIACO 16 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Internal Referrals The documentation received for comment is complex and lengthy, comprising both high-level strategic documentation and detailed technical investigations and analysis. Given the short timeframe to review documentation and prepare a report to Council, internal referrals included a template for internal departments to generate a clear and consistently structured response. This ensures that the comments are easy to follow, consistently structured and readily able to be attached to this Council report.

The following section of this report provides a summary of the feedback provided by the relevant internal departments. A consolidated copy of all detailed internal referral feedback is provided at Attachment 3.

Internal Department Workshop On 30 July 2020, representatives from all of the City’s internal departments engaged in an extensive workshop with DevelopmentWA and part of their consultant team. DevelopmentWA and their consultant team provided a detailed explanation of each of the 11 Urban Framework Strategies. This was a significant opportunity to explore areas of concern, ideas and options for improvements before finalising internal comments.

A range of issues emerged through this process relating to sustainability, building height, Court Place, active playing fields, the cultural space and tree removal.

Elected Member Strategic Workshop The City held a strategic workshop with Elected Members on 4 August 2020. The feedback from the workshop aligned with many of the issues and opportunities that the City was investigating. However, several ideas emerged that had not previously been considered, and some have been consolidated into the City’s comments.

Document Review The City has reviewed the referred documentation and internal comments and feedback and consolidated this into a series of recommended improvements to the draft Master Plan.

Comment The City’s comment on the draft Master Plan has been consolidated into an attachment (Attachment 1) for ease of transfer to DevelopmentWA. The following section of this report should be read in conjunction with the attachment.

General The Subi East Vision Concept Plan underpinned a decision by the State Government on the project scope and the level of investment required. This also provided the foundation for the preparation of the draft Master Plan and key development outcomes that must be achieved as follows:

 Achieve a variety of open space – including active sporting spaces on the oval;  Density will be part of the new development to accommodate numbers outlined in LPS 5 (minimum 2,000 dwellings);  State Heritage buildings to be retained in the development area, working partnership with the Heritage Council of Western Australia;  The project will be a demonstration project for Community Title;  The Oval will be retained in its current location and orientation;  Bob Hawke College will integrate with the precinct;  Retention of Mueller Park as a public open space;

CITY OF SUBIACO 17 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 Delivery of sustainable buildings and precinct strategies; and  Delivery of a minimum of 12% affordable housing integrated across the redevelopment area.

Subiaco Oval Co-Shared Multi-use Recreational Facility (CMRF) The draft Master Plan shows the potential for a Subiaco Oval Co-Shared Multi-Use Recreational Facility (CMRF) integrating recreational and educational uses with provision for basement public car parking subject to a Council business case located to the west of Bob Hawke College. However, there is no guidance on how vehicle access is intended to service this site from Roberts Road.

At its Ordinary Council Meeting of 7 July 2020, Council considered an item (Item C2) relating to the CMRF and resolved as follows:

“Council directs the CEO to: 1. Conduct further work to derisk the ‘Co-Shared Multi-Use Recreational Facility’ (CMRF) project before committing further financial resources; 2. Seek in-principle agreement with DPLH and the Department of Education on terms acceptable to the City, before committing further financial resources; and 3. ‘Work with the Mayor to advocate for government support and government funding towards the CMRF.”

The decision followed a previous Council resolution for the City to takes steps to secure land tenure between Subiaco Oval and Bob Hawke College.

The City is progressing Council’s resolutions from these meetings. Although the draft Master Plan doesn’t go into any particular details on the CMRF, it does identify its indicative location and need for Council to consider the merits of it in the form of a business case. In this regard, the draft Master Plan is considered to be generally consistent with the City’s position being progressed on the CMRF.

Active Playing Fields The draft Master Plan does not deliver 1.73ha of active playing fields in addition to the Subiaco Oval surface which the City has been advocating for on an ongoing basis. The City’s existing active playing fields are at full capacity and the Subi East Redevelopment project provides opportunity for additional active playing fields within the City. Further discussion on this matter is contained later in this report.

Two-Way of Hay Street and Roberts Road The draft Master Plan does not commit to necessary upgrades to convert Hay Street and Roberts Road to a two-way configuration, which is an action in the City’s recently endorsed Local Planning Strategy 2020 (Strategy). This is a critical infrastructure upgrade to resolve traffic, public transport and walkability issues in the context of such a significant increase in population and activity, both for Subiaco generally, and for the Subi East Redevelopment Area.

Planning

Context The City is concerned at the level of consideration given to local planning context, particularly with respect the relationship of Subi East with the Subiaco Activity Centre Plan (SACP), the West Leederville Activity Centre Plan (WLACP) and West Perth.

CITY OF SUBIACO 18 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

While the Subi East Redevelopment Area is defined within a precise area, the planning framework should be well integrated with the planning framework of its context. The draft Master Plan acknowledges the actual context of the precinct, but it does little to acknowledge what is planned for the future in its context. Building height A key concern relates to the unlimited building height afforded to some areas of the precinct. Unlimited building height is not supported due to the limited certainty it provides to key stakeholders. The City recommends that the building height limitations in the draft Master Plan be clarified and that an upper cap in height is implemented through a discretionary height framework for landmark sites. The building height controls throughout the precinct should be subject to careful modelling and design testing to ensure that the building height plan minimises the impact of significant height on the locality and adjoining properties. The notion of accommodating over 1,000 dwellings within the PMH Neighbourhood is particularly challenging. Further consideration should be given to shift building bulk, scale and mass towards Thomas Street and to improve the interface of the development with the corner of Hay Street and Hamilton Street, maintaining adequate separation between buildings within. In considering this, further regard should be given to carefully managing the impact on the heritage buildings within the PMH Neighbourhood.

Railway Neighbourhood Further consideration should be given to the potential role of the Railway Neighbourhood in achieving the objectives and vision of the draft Master Plan. It is acknowledged that this area is held in private and fragmented land ownership, but the role of this neighbourhood should not be understated. There are significant development sites with aging apartment stock between 2,300 to 3,600m2 and several smaller, yet significant, sites that should be carefully considered.

Synonymous with the above, the draft Master Plan should consider and contemplate the possibility that the area over the Perth-Fremantle rail line can be capitalised for several opportunities. Including for pedestrian and cycle links to West Leederville, and to accommodate additional open space, public realm and development potential.

Roberts Road interface It recommended that the draft Master Plan identify the potential for buildings along Roberts Road to include a design approach that opens up the ground floor as much as possible, both visually and for pedestrian movement between Roberts Road and the Subiaco Oval.

Court Place Owing to its existing and proposed context, there is a significant opportunity to create a highly pedestrianised space that links the West Leederville rail station to the green link that runs along the northern boundary of Bob Hawke College.

The Master Plan contemplates Court Place as a ‘shady, activated and pedestrian- friendly street’. The City considers that this should be extended down along Subiaco Road to, at a minimum, the extent that the green link fronts Subiaco Road. This could allow opportunities for the open space in the green link to ‘bleed’ out into the road reserve, increasing the actual and perceived amount of open space, whilst prioritising pedestrians which will provide increased safety for Bob Hawke College and make an attractive environment to draw people into Subiaco.

Green Link

CITY OF SUBIACO 19 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The City’s position regarding the Green Link is consistent with the Council Resolution regarding Bob Hawke College Stage 2 which was considered by Council at its 21 July 2020, Ordinary Council Meeting. The green link should be appropriately landscaped, including provision of lighting to increase amenity and safety for users in the evening and night. There are also future opportunities to incorporate public art within this area.

Careful consideration should be given to the appropriate treatment of the green link as it acts as an important point of arrival into the Subiaco East area for people using the underpass from the Town of Cambridge and train passengers alighting at the West Leederville train station.

Wind tunnelling The construction of high density podium and tower developments in the area may have the potential to create wind tunnel issues within the public realm. The draft Master Plan should be modified to consider and articulate this risk, and ensure that wind modelling is undertaken during the design guidelines stage. This will help mitigate the risk that proposed highly activated public places with exposure to the prevailing south westerly winds are made unusable or unattractive due to excessive wind tunnelling.

Heritage The draft Master Plan rests on a thorough consideration of the cultural heritage significance and heritage values of the different elements of the Subi East Redevelopment Area. The key aspects considered include the conservation of significant heritage places and elements, the interpretative methods and mediums proposed in the draft Master Plan, and future interpretation strategies proposed for the redevelopment area as identified in the Interpretation Strategy.

Further consideration could clarify the re-introduction of the turnstiles at the Subiaco Oval Gates, the cultural heritage significance of Reserve 9337, the Sandover Medal Tablets and Aleppo Pines, and interpretative content held at the Subiaco Museum.

A comprehensive list of recommended improvements is in Attachment 1. There is further detailed feedback in the internal referral comments in Attachment 3.

Transport

Traffic and Transport The City generally supports the proposed road network and modifications, and the emphasis of the draft Master Plan on facilitating transit-oriented development in the right location.

However, the road design requires further review or investigation to determine feasibility and impact on traffic, parking and pedestrians.

It is recommended that DevelopmentWA prepare a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the City as soon as possible to guide the staging, responsibility and development of key infrastructure upgrades/modifications, including the Roberts Road and Hay Street two-way project. The two-way project is included as actions in both the City’s Local Planning Strategy and the City’s Transport, Access and Parking Strategy (TAPS).

CITY OF SUBIACO 20 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The draft Master Plan and any other future design guidelines/precinct plans should be consistent with the City’s Transport, Access and Parking Strategy, and the City’s draft Bike Plan that is to be published later this year.

A comprehensive list of recommended improvements is in Attachment 1. There is further detailed feedback in the internal referral comments in Attachment 3.

Public Open Space, Public Realm and Place

Tree removal The City does not support the incorporation of City trees into future private developments, nor does it support tree removal or tree relocation. Consistent with the element objectives of the R-Codes Volume 2, site planning should maximise retention of existing healthy trees, and protect the viability of adjoining trees. Adequate measures are required to improve the tree canopy in the long term, and to offset any reduction of tree canopy from pre-development conditions.

It is recommended that key actions in relation to tree canopy from the City’s Urban Forest Strategy should be incorporated into the draft Master Plan, this includes specific tree canopy targets for different types of areas. The draft Master Plan should set out high-level canopy targets that align with the City’s Urban Forest Strategy, this includes 34% for parks, 28% of streetscapes and 16% for residential areas and other development sites.

Funding for public open space The proposed network of public open spaces throughout the draft Master Plan is supported, however, the City is concerned that arrangements for funding the maintenance of various public open spaces have not been clarified. DevelopmentWA should be responsible for the costs of maintaining these assets until sufficient rates revenue is generated before responsibility is transferred to the City. Consideration should be given to the staging of the development to minimise this risk while delivering the public open spaces at the right moment for use by the community.

Outdoor recreation and leisure opportunities and events There is a missed opportunity to consider the integration of outdoor recreational and leisure elements within the public realm throughout the precinct. Further, there is an opportunity to explore the integration of public realm infrastructure and design elements that support the hosting of events within the precinct.

Activation The draft Master Plan illustrates a large portion of moderately active building frontage/edge (office). Office developments on the ground floor do not typically provide for an active frontage, particularly where this adjoins the public realm. The City recommends that DevelopmentWA further consider active uses for ground floor tenancies which interface with the public realm, a flexible approach to this is supported.

Cultural space On 12 June 2018 at its Ordinary Council Meeting, Council resolved:

“That the Council authorises the Mayor and CEO to explore the opportunity of a “Public Cultural Attraction” to take full advantage of the Subiaco Oval

CITY OF SUBIACO 21 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

redevelopment and celebrate culture (including our Sporting and Aboriginal heritage) and the arts and prepare a formal concept document.”

On 27 November 2018, Council further resolved to approve a budget for conceptual development diagrams and to support advocacy and communication of the Cultural Space.

The City has been advocating for the Cultural space on an ongoing basis through the Precinct Liaison Committee and the preparation of a concept. However, DevelopmentWA has chosen not to acknowledge these advocacy efforts in the draft Master Plan.

The land just east of the Heritage Gates along Roberts Road is the most appropriate location for a potential cultural space of regional significance to benefit the broader Perth Metropolitan Region and the State. This building should be designed with a clear line of sight through the development from Roberts Road to maintain a strong visual and physical relationship with the Subiaco Oval, that would be consistent with ‘Planning: Roberts Road Interface’ above. The recommended location for the Cultural Space will draw visitors in along the Six Seasons Biddi from recommended pedestrianised environment of Court Place and Subiaco Road into the Subiaco Town Centre through Market Square.

The City is pleased to see the space at the heritage gates is identified as a civic space that celebrates Subiaco Oval as the historic home of WA Football. However, a significant anchor in the form of an iconic and well-designed cultural space would significantly improve the outcome. This space, along with supporting ancillary uses, would generate a critical diversity of land uses in this location, which increases the potential that it becomes a thriving, vibrant and activated place for the enjoyment of the community.

Interpretation The Interpretation Strategy is prepared following the National Trusts of Australia’s (WA) Philosophical approach and complements the Cultural Context and Place Narrative. Most elements of the Interpretation Strategy are either supported or supported subject to improvement.

The Western Australian Football Commission (WAFC) owns the Sandover Medallist Walk, which is currently in storage by DevelopmentWA. The City supports the reinterpretation of the Sandover Medallist Walk in principle. However, the approach has not been determined and should be subject to further consideration in the future.

A comprehensive list of recommended improvements is in Attachment 1. There is further detailed feedback in the internal referral comments in Attachment 3.

Sustainability and infrastructure

Sustainability There are concerns about the level of consideration afforded to sustainable development in the master planning process to date.

The approach to sustainability is referenced in the objectives of the draft Master Plan, but sustainability has not been properly considered throughout the documentation. There is a disconnect between the Subi East Vision and the Sustainability Vision that

CITY OF SUBIACO 22 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING risks a siloed and incremental approach to sustainability, rather than a clear, coordinated and ambitious approach.

Among a range of other key recommendations, DevelopmentWA should use the draft Master Plan to articulate and commit to a measurable target/benchmark for achieving best practice low carbon development and appropriate climate risk management as a priority.

A comprehensive list of recommended improvements is in Attachment 1. There is further detailed feedback in the internal referral comments in Attachment 3.

Other Matters and Considerations

Active Playing Fields The City understands that DevelopmentWA was unable to accommodate the 1.73ha active playing fields in addition to the Subiaco Oval surface within the draft Master Plan, which the City has been advocating for on an ongoing basis.

The Subiaco Oval, which is greater than 2ha, is now available for community use and junior sport after an extended period of being closed to the public. However, this is not sufficient to accommodate the ongoing expansion of the Subiaco population on a per capita basis.

The draft Master Plan proposes a network of public open spaces that integrate into the design of the precinct. Some facilitate opportunities for informal sport and recreation, and this requires further exploration.

While it is outside of the remit of the redevelopment area, the City notes that the oval at Perth Modern School is not currently available for community use. The oval comprises approximately 1.4ha, and its dimensions appear to make it suitable for two junior soccer fields or one senior soccer field, see Figure 2 below.

Figure 2: Perth Modern Oval Area

The City considers this space provides an opportunity to investigate the possibility of obtaining further active playing fields in the area. Combined with the agreed community use of Subiaco Oval, the use of this space may go some way to alleviating some of the current pressures on the capacity of existing active playing fields in Subiaco.

CITY OF SUBIACO 23 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

As this is out of scope for the draft Master Plan, it does not form part of the City’s submission to DevelopmentWA. The City will engage with the Department of Education to discuss the possibility of a shared user agreement to support the use of the oval at Perth Modern for junior sport. Administrative Under the Agreed Positions in 1.3 Project Parameters, point 2 refers to LPS5 as setting a minimum number of 2,000 dwellings. This is not correct as LPS 5 does not set dwellings targets. The City of Subiaco Local Planning Strategy 2020 sets a dwelling target of 2,900 new dwellings for the Subi East Redevelopment Area. The City recommends that DevelopmentWA correct this.

Master Plan Process: Next Steps DevelopmentWA will consider all submissions it receives from the community, Local Government and State Government departments and service agencies before finalising the draft Master Plan. Once that occurs, the next stage will likely include the preparation of detailed design guidelines for each precinct, an infrastructure delivery plan and a subdivision plan.

Conclusion The City has undertaken a comprehensive review of the draft Master Plan and all supporting documentation and focused its feedback on the 11 Urban Framework Strategies. Given this project is being fast-tracked to facilitate post-COVID economic recovery, it is likely to be progressed quickly by the State Government.

The draft Master Plan includes a range of positive measures, as discussed in this report. However, the City’s position is that DevelopmentWA needs to address a range of issues with modifications to the draft Master Plan.

The draft Master Plan should align with the City’s Local Planning Strategy. The City recommends that DevelopmentWA set aside land for a cultural space of regional significance at the south-west edge of the Oval, pursue the two-way configuration for Hay Street and Roberts Road and give further consideration to capping the railway reservation. Furthermore, an additional 1.73ha of active playing fields should integrate into the design of the precinct.

The City recommends that DevelopmentWA implement a greater level of certainty for building height throughout the precinct, further consideration to the role of the Railway Neighbourhood and built form of the PMH Neighbourhood.

Overall, the draft Master Plan is a comprehensive and robust document that has been underpinned by ongoing and extensive engagement with a diverse cross-section of key stakeholders. Further work is required to improve the draft Master Plan and to translate it into an effective planning framework, and an overall positive infill development outcome.

Strategic Implications

Local Planning Strategy The Western Australian Planning Commission (WAPC) endorsed the Strategy on 28 February 2020. As the Strategy includes actions for the Subi East Redevelopment Area it is an appropriate planning instrument within which to consider in the context of the draft Master Plan.

CITY OF SUBIACO 24 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The Strategy sets out a series of objectives, strategies and implementation/actions within six Strategy Elements, which are shown in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3: City of Subiaco Local Planning Strategy 2020 - Strategy Elements

The draft Master Plan is generally consistent with the relevant strategies and actions in the Strategy:

 Work with the MRA (now DevelopmentWA) to ensure the re-use of Subiaco Oval primarily for recreational activity for the community. Provision of community facilities in this precinct is a priority for the City;  Retain the green link between Subi Oval and Mueller Park;  Maintain and enhance the green links shown on the Strategy Map;  Investigate ways in which the community can share facilities created for the new Inner City College for community use;  Work with the MRA to ensure Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles are embedded within the MRA’s design guidelines, with particular focus on access routes to schools, community infrastructure and railway stations.  The areas identified by the City for accommodating an increased population and housing area: …c. The Subi East Redevelopment Area (under MRA Control)…;  Work with the MRA to provide appropriate densities in Redevelopment Areas to achieve a substantial proportion of the dwelling targets;  Investigate a modest housing strategy with the goal of encouraging a greater diversity of new dwellings delivered under a new planning framework, as well as removal of existing planning constraints limiting small scale residential proposals. A particular emphasis on retaining open space and significant vegetation, while delivering additional, affordable housing, should be investigated.  Facilitate a mix of apartment sizes, including those that cater for families;  Carry out a transport impact assessment for the targeted growth areas of the Strategy, where required; and

CITY OF SUBIACO 25 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 A State Government co-ordinated, funded and managed approach is required to achieve the necessary upgrades to existing infrastructure and services. There is a clear need to investigate servicing capacities relating to the Targeted Growth Areas. Basic services such as power, water and sewerage are State Government responsibilities.

However, some actions require further attention as set out below.

Activity Centres, Economy and Tourism One of the actions under the element is to ‘Work with the MRA to implement a cultural space within the Subi East Redevelopment Area.’

The City considers that the building located on the South West edge of the oval and to the east of the Heritage Gates is the best location for a Cultural Space of regional significance. A Cultural Space and any associated ancillary uses facilitate activation and significantly diversify the land use mix at the Heritage Gates, which is identified as a highly activated area in the draft Master Plan. The building on the South West edge of the Oval is not a particularly good location for a medium scale residential/mixed-use development, as it stands in isolation between the Heritage Gates and the potential WAFC space. Furthermore, the orientation and shape of the lot lead to poor-quality internal amenity levels for residential development, as access to direct northern sunlight for many apartments along the southern face of the site is unavailable. This site is better suited to a non-residential development, as it is perfectly oriented to capitalise on its solar aspect and achieve a best practice solar passive design for energy efficiency.

Population and Housing One of the actions under this element is to ‘Work with the relevant State Government authorities and stakeholders (such as the WAPC, DOT and Public Transport Authority (PTA)) to sink the railway line and provide for appropriate development and open space/green space on the rail reserve.’

The draft Master Plan has not sufficiently considered this since the Vision Concept was published. Point 27 identifies a future rail capping opportunity in the Subi East Redevelopment Vision Concept 2019. In the draft Master Plan, point 27 has changed to point 24 and moved to the Western end of the railway reservation, near Haydn Bunton Drive.

It is unclear why the future rail capping opportunity hasn’t advanced further in the draft Master Plan, nor why the opportunity has shifted from east to west. At the eastern end of the railway reservation, the rail link is already significantly sunken below ground level which substantially reduces the extent of earthworks and makes railway capping a viable option.

Transport, Access, Parking and Infrastructure One of the actions under this element is to ‘implement the Roberts Road and Hay Street two-way project.’

The City is of the view that the conversion of Hay Street and Roberts Road to a two- way configuration is critical to the success of the precinct. Particularly concerning the anticipated population growth, and for the delivery of effective public transport services to the precinct, notably Bob Hawke College.

CITY OF SUBIACO 26 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The catchment for Bob Hawke College extends to the northeast, through Leederville and Mount Hawthorn to parts of Joondanna and Glendalough. Bus services seeking to access Bob-Hawke College from within the intake area to the north are forced to enter the area via Railway Parade and the Hamilton Street bridge from Loftus Street. The conversion of Roberts Road to a two-way configuration would enable opportunities for all bus routes servicing the area to be revised and improved. Two-way roads allow greater connectivity and permeability through the road network. This would allow buses to come from the north to enter Roberts Road from the Loftus Street, creating a logical and direct route to Bob Hawke College, the PMH and Subi Oval precincts, and the Subiaco Town Centre.

Statutory and Policy Considerations

Statutory In early 2018, the State Government created a Redevelopment Area over Kitchener Park, Subiaco Oval, PMH and all of the land north of Subiaco Road, between Haydn Bunton Drive and Thomas Street. When the Subiaco Redevelopment Scheme No. 2 (SRS 2) was gazetted on 23 March 2018, planning authority transferred from the City of Subiaco to DevelopmentWA. Accordingly, all development within Subi East is governed by the SRS 2 and LPS 5 is of no effect. DevleopmentWA administers the SRS 2, and an opportunity for the City to provide comment on all planning matters is available through a formal referral process.

Notwithstanding the above, in consultation with DevelopmentWA, LPS 5 has been designed to facilitate a smooth process for normalisation. Normalisation refers to when planning authority transferred back to the City of Subiaco in the future. The City doesn’t expect this to occur for approximately 10 to 20 years.

Policy The City is not required to carry out public consultation in accordance with clause 14 of Council’s Local Planning Policy 1.4 – Public Consultation for Planning Proposals as this is a DevelopmentWA referral.

The City expects DevelopmentWA to undertake further consultation and ongoing community and stakeholder engagement through the preparation of Design Guidelines for each neighbourhood.

Risk and Asset Implications The draft Master Plan describes a wide range of smaller and larger public open spaces to be created through the precinct. The City is concerned it will be responsible for the costs of landscape maintenance, and there will be no rates revenue in this area for some time. The responsibility for maintenance should rest with DevelopmentWA until there is sufficient rates revenue. Alternatively, the City may undertake the maintenance subject to funding by DevelopmentWA, subject to a formalised agreement between the City and DevelopmentWA.

The City recommends that DevelopmentWA acknowledge this in the draft Master Plan or its supporting documentation, to carefully align the staging of the public open spaces with each phase of construction. This arrangement will minimise the financial burden on DevelopmentWA and the City, by ensuring rates revenue is provided to cover the cost of maintaining these assets.

Financial Implications

CITY OF SUBIACO 27 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The City cannot quantify the financial implications of the draft Master Plan as there is a range of factors that remain uncertain at this stage of the project and this needs to be considered further.

Social and Environmental Implications The Subi East redevelopment project provides a significant amount of public open space, walkability, social interaction and sporting facilities for the community.

The draft Master Plan retains Subiaco Oval for community use and leverages the heritage gates to frame a landmark entrance to the precinct. However, the draft Master Plan misses an opportunity to incorporate a Cultural Space of regional significance in this location.

Further to the above, 1.73ha of active playing fields do not integrate into the draft Master Plan. Further consideration is required to facilitate additional space for active playing fields within the area.

The City is concerned that the draft Master Plan does not sufficiently commit to facilitate best practice sustainable development and consider the whole of life climate risk of the project. DevelopmentWA should thoroughly investigate these matters, commit to targets, incorporate them into the vision and objectives, and reinforce them throughout the draft Master Plan and the supporting documentation.

Attachments 1. Recommended comments to DevelopmentWA to improve the draft Master Plan and supporting documentation. 2. Subi East draft Master Plan. 3. Consolidated Internal Referral Comments.

CITY OF SUBIACO 28 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

C2 ENDORSEMENT OF DRAFT WASTE PLAN 2020-2025*

REPORT FROM DIRECTOR TECHNICAL SERVICES Authors: Manager Operations and Environment, Gray Stead Coordinator Infrastructure Maintenance and Waste Services, Robert Wyllie Date: 8 September 2020 File Reference: A/5497 Voting Requirements: Simple - more than half members present required to vote in favour

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Davis / Seconded Cr Rowe The Draft Waste Plan 2020-2025 (Attachment 1) is endorsed for community consultation. CARRIED EN BLOC 11/0 6.21pm

Executive Summary  The Department of Water and Environmental Regulation (DWER), has given notice that the City of Subiaco is required to prepare a waste plan under section 40(4) of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2007 (WARR). The City of Subiaco’s final waste plan, when adopted and endorsed by Council, must be submitted to DWER by 31 March 2021.

 The process of putting waste plans in place consists of the following: o Local Government officers creating Draft Waste Plans which are submitted for assessment by DWER (completed); o DWER then approves the Draft Waste Plan subject to Council endorsement (completed); o The draft Waste Plan is advertised for community feedback; o The Draft Waste Plan is then submitted to Council for endorsement; o The Waste Plan is then submitted to DWER for final acceptance by 31 March 2021.

 The purpose of this Waste Plan is to guide the City of Subiaco in sustainable waste and recycling practices to establish and maintain consistent, cost effective and functional waste management practices to reduce waste to landfill. This is driven by the targets set in the State Government’s, Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery (WARR) Strategy 2030.

 The plan aims to provide a: o Reduction in municipal solid waste (MSW) of 5% per capita o Increase in (MSW) material recovery to 67% o Food organics garden organics (FOGO) systems. o Improve public place and town centre collection infrastructure: Solar bins o Develop a waste local law o Reduce illegal dumping/littering o Implement waste behaviour change programs o Reduce contamination in recycling streams

CITY OF SUBIACO 29 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 The draft Waste plan will be advertised for community consultation for a period of four weeks. Following the community consultation a report will be presented to Council for endorsement.

Background Waste Plans have been introduced by DWER as a way of monitoring Local Government progress towards the targets in the WARR Strategy 2030. The headline strategies relevant to Local Governments and Regional Councils are:

Avoid

2025 Reduction in MSW generation per capita by 5% (from 2014/15 rate)

2030 Reduction in MSW generation per capita by 10% (from 2014/15 rate)

Recover

2020 increase MSW material recovery to 65% (Perth and Peel)

2025 increase MSW material recovery to 67% (Perth and Peel)

2030 increase MSW material recovery to 70% (Perth and Peel)

2025 All Local Governments (Perth and Peel) provide consistent three bin kerbside collection systems that include separation of FOGO from other waste categories

From 2020 Recover energy only from residual waste

Protect

2030 No more than 15% of Perth and Peel regions’ waste is disposed to landfill

2030 Move towards zero illegal dumping

2030 Move towards zero littering

Waste Plans form part of the integrated planning and reporting process for Local Government, and once in place will require annual reporting.

CEOs of all applicable Local Governments and Regional Councils received a “Notice to Prepare a Waste Plan under Section 40(4) of the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2007” from the CEO of DWER in November 2019.

The process of putting waste plans in place consists of the following:  Local Government officers creating Draft Waste Plans which are submitted for assessment by DWER (completed);  DWER then approves the Draft Waste Plan subject to Council endorsement (completed);  The draft Waste Plan is advertised for community feedback;  The Draft Waste Plan is then submitted to Council for endorsement;  The Waste Plan is then submitted to DWER for final acceptance by 31 March 2021.

Should the Local Government not submit a Waste Plan by the due date, or the submitted Waste Plan is not acceptable to DWER, they have the ability to create Waste

CITY OF SUBIACO 30 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Plans on a Local Government’s behalf and the costs involved in creating the plan are recoverable from the Local Government.

In May 2020 the timelines for waste plan preparation were extended as a result of COVID-19.

Comment The City’s Waste Plan (2020 – 2025) consolidates the actions within the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery (WARR) Strategy 2030.

The plan further streamlines relevant actions identified in the Sustainability and Resilience Action Plan 2016 – 2021, and supports the delivery of specific objectives identified in the Strategic community plan 2017 - 2027.

The City’s Draft Waste Plan was submitted to DWER on the 6 February 2020 and following two revisions the City received notification on the 21 April 2020 that it was approved.

The City’s Draft Waste Plan provides an important link between the State Government WARR Strategy and local government waste management activities. This will ensure that we meet our obligation to our current community and future generations, to extract more from our valuable resources and to better manage the disposal of our waste.

City of Subiaco Current Waste Management Initiatives The City provides a variety of waste services and information to residents, either directly or through the Western Metropolitan Regional Council (MMRC). A brief summary of these activities is listed below:

Waste Avoidance  Through the WMRC, the City provides several programs including the Waste Watchers program to enable residents to live with less waste. The City promotes this through their website and in communications with residents. The Waste Watchers program has been developed from the long-running Earth Carers program and is designed to have increased reach and accessibility. It consists of workshops, tours, talks and events.

Kerbside  The City provides a 120lt general waste bin as standard and provides fortnightly recycling services. The City has completed the changeover from a two stream to single stream 240lt recycling program for domestic recycling and will complete the changeover of commercial and multi-unit dwellings by 2022. This will be consistent with other Metropolitan Councils.  The City provides a weekly bagged and bulk garden waste service.

Bulk Verge  The City provides a scheduled bulk verge waste collection twice a year.

Drop off  Residents can drop off household batteries/CFL globes and tubes/printer cartridges for recycling at Homebase, Lords Recreation Centre and Subiaco Library. The materials are collected by the WMRC and taken to the West Metro Recycling Centre.

CITY OF SUBIACO 31 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 Residents can access recycling and disposal services at the West Metro Recycling Centre 7 days a week including: o Free recycling - cardboard, clothing, electronic waste, batteries (household and lead acid), gas cylinders, mobile phones, motor oil, CFL’s, printer cartridges, scrap metal, polystyrene, X-rays and household hazardous waste (paints, pesticides, aerosols and flammables). o Disposal of appropriately wrapped asbestos-containing material for a fee o Tyre and mattress recycling is undertaken for a fee. o Disposal of both bulk and green waste for a fee depending on size of load.

Community education / behaviour change  Information provided via the City’s website with links to home waste management information provided by WMRC’s Communications and Education team.  All residents can access the WMRC Recycling Hotline 9384 6711 – where their recycling questions will be answered.  WMRC is actively involved in the WALGA consistent communications campaign and provide graphics and promotional material to the City.  Print media – the City has a regular advertisement page in the Post Newspaper which features waste information.  Social media – the City’s and WMRC Waste Watcher’s Facebook and Instagram pages are used to promote information to residents.

By 2025 all Local Governments (Perth and Peel) must provide consistent three bin kerbside collection systems that include separation of Food Organics and Garden Organics (FOGO) from other waste categories. This means that the City will have to cease its on demand green waste service, provide an additional 240lt FOGO green bin and change the existing collection schedules.

Consultation The City held a strategic workshop for Elected Members on the 25 August 2020 to discuss the Draft Waste Plan.

The City of Subiaco will provide the opportunity for the community to comment on the draft plan. Community consultation will be conducted via a survey on the City’s online engagement platform, Have Your Say Subiaco, and will be open for four weeks.

Strategic Implications This document is consistent with the objectives of Councils adopted:

Sustainability and Resilience Strategy 2016 - 2021. Particularly:  Community – Pilot an organic waste collection service. Strategic community plan 2017 – 2027. Particularly:  Objective 2.1.5 – maintain an efficient and sustainable waste and recycling service.

Statutory and Policy Considerations This draft plan aligns with the Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery (WARR) Strategy 2030.

CITY OF SUBIACO 32 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Risk and Asset Implications If the City does not develop a waste plan DWER have the ability, under the act, to create a waste plan on the City’s behalf and the costs will be recovered from the City.

The draft plan provides a framework to ensure the City meets its material recovery, landfill diversion targets and better manages the disposal of our waste

Financial The provision of the City’s waste services are based on a self-funding model. The financial implications of implementing the waste plan actions, (excluding the move to FOGO), can be accommodated within the Strategic Financial Plan which has a recurrent annual budget that is sufficient to fund the activities within the plan.

Once the City has a clearer understanding of the financial implications of moving to FOGO this will be presented to Council.

Social and Environmental Implications Environmental and social implications of this plan provide for a consistent framework to ensure that the City and its community are working together to create a circular economy (avoid, recycle, reuse), with a greater focus on avoidance as well as moving to targets for material recovery and environmental protection in addition to landfill diversion. This will ensure we minimise waste, protect our environment and create a more sustainable low waste economy for future generations.

Attachments 1. Draft Waste Plan 2020-2025

CITY OF SUBIACO 33 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

C3 ONSLOW PARK TENNIS CLUB – PROPOSAL*

REPORT FROM DIRECTOR CORPORATE SERVICES Authors: Manager Commercial Services and Property, Joel Guest Coordinator Land and Property, Alice Kavanagh Date: 8 September 2020 File Reference: A/5497 Voting Requirements: Simple - more than half committee members present required to vote in favour

Cr Jennings returned to the chambers at 7.04pm after item C1 was discussed.

Cr Hamersley returned to the chambers at 7.04pm after item C1 was discussed.

Cr Hamersley declared an impartiality interest in this item.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Nash / Seconded Cr de Vries 1. In response to the Onslow Park Tennis Club (“OPTC”) written proposal received in April 2020 (“Proposal”), Council authorises the CEO to: a. hand over responsibility for the maintenance of the seven grass tennis courts to the OPTC; b. undertake, at the City’s cost, resurfacing of the four hard tennis courts in FY 2020/21; c. undertake, at the City’s cost, upgrades and repairs to the fencing and gates in FY 2021/22 (subject to budget approval); and d. provide a letter of support to any CSRFF application that the OPTC may wish to make during the 3 year period commencing on the date of this report, subject to, and conditional on, the OPTC executing a new lease agreement (“Lease”), on terms acceptable to the City, including that: i. the term of the Lease will be 5 years; ii. the OPTC will have 1 x 5 year option to renew the Lease; iii. the Lease will include a non-exclusive licence to use and access the tennis courts; iv. the rent will be $3,000 per annum excluding GST in accordance with the City’s Social Property Policy Framework (“SPPF”); v. the OPTC will, at its expense, maintain the tennis courts without any financial contribution from the City; and vi. the OPTC will be entitled to all sub-lease income from the childcare (without a requirement that the income be placed in a separate trust account), provided that the sub-lease income is used by the OPTC for the purposes of repairs and maintenance of the OPTC’s facilities and the tennis courts, and otherwise consistent with the SPPF. 2. All other parts of the Proposal not be accepted. 3. Council authorises the CEO to execute any documents, deeds and agreements (and, if required, to affix the common seal) necessary to give effect to this resolution. CARRIED 11/0 7.05pm

CITY OF SUBIACO 34 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Executive Summary The most recent lease agreement between the City of Subiaco and the Onslow Park Tennis Club (“OPTC”) commenced on 1 April 1983 and expired on 28 February 1992. The club has been in “holding over” under this agreement ever since.

Whilst the leased area includes the Tennis Club Pavilion building, it does not include the adjacent tennis courts. There are eleven tennis courts in total, being seven grass tennis courts and four hard tennis courts.

A number of changes have occurred since 1992. For example, the OPTC now sub- leases part of the Tennis Club Pavilion to Smart Start Child Care. The City understands that the sub-lease currently generates about $40,000 per annum in income.

On 19 February 2012, Council resolved to support the sub-lease provided that the sub- lease income was placed in a separate trust account and used for the purposes of funding building repairs and improvements to the Tennis Cub Pavilion.

The City has, over the years, made multiple attempts to negotiate a new lease with the OPTC. The latest attempt was in 2019.

In 2019, the City provided the OPTC with a new lease agreement for its perusal. The lease agreement incorporated a provision that the sub-lease income be placed in a separate trust account and used for the purposes of funding building repairs and improvements to the Tennis Cub Pavilion.

At the time of writing this report, the City has been unable to procure the OPTC’s signature to the new lease agreement notwithstanding the OPTC continues to enjoy the benefit of the child care sub-lease income.

It is important to document the relationship between the City and the OPTC in the form of a new lease agreement, in order to:

 clearly delineate the parties’ rights and obligations;

 allocate risk in a proportionate and measured manner;

 address the changes to the OPTC’s operating model since 1992, including the sub-lease to Smart Start Child Care;

 adopt a consistent approach to the City’s social tenants in accordance with the City’s Social Property Policy Framework; and

 provide the parties with clarity and certainty surrounding their rights and obligations moving forward.

At present, the City maintains the tennis courts and the Tennis Club Pavilion for the exclusive benefit of the OPTC and its 230 members.

It costs the City approximately $40,000 per annum to maintain the seven grass tennis courts. The City recoups on average $10,000 (i.e. 25%) of this from the OPTC through a contribution to grounds maintenance fees (averaged over the last three years).

In April 2020, the OPTC provided the City with a written proposal (“Proposal”).

CITY OF SUBIACO 35 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

A copy of the Proposal is attached to this report as Attachment 1. The Proposal is comprehensive, and comprises 15 items.

The City has given due and careful consideration to the Proposal.

Whilst the City supports some items of the Proposal, other items are unlikely to be workable or supported at this time.

Background

The Tennis Club Pavilion The Onslow Park Tennis Club (“OPTC”) was founded in 1925.

The Tennis Club Pavilion building dates from 1960 when the City and the OPTC entered into an agreement and the City provided the funds upfront for the construction of the clubhouse.

Once the building was completed a lease agreement was effected, and the OPTC repaid the loan over the term of the lease, in this case 20 years. This was a common arrangement between Local Governments and sporting clubs at the time.

The most recent lease agreement between the City and the OPTC commenced on 1 April 1983 and expired on 28 February 1992. The club has been in “holding over” under this agreement ever since. This existing lease agreement includes the Tennis Club Pavilion building but does not specifically include the adjacent tennis courts.

Property details In 1902, the Crown granted the City a vesting order (now called a management order) over Rosalie Reserve 7214 (“Reserve”) for the purpose of “recreation”.

In April 1983, the City entered into an agreement to lease part of the Reserve (“Leased Area”) to the OPTC.

In January 2016, the area surrounding the Tennis Club Pavilion was excised from the Reserve creating a separate lot (being Lot 500 on Reserve 52260) for the purpose of “Recreation and Childcare”. This process meant that the OPTC could legitimately sub- lease part of the Tennis Cub Pavilion to Smart Start Child Care.

An aerial image below shows the Tennis Club Pavilion and courts:

CITY OF SUBIACO 36 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Sublease to child care operator The OPTC has been permitting the hire or sub-lease of its Tennis Club Pavilion to a childcare operator since at least 2004. Whilst there are records that demonstrate that the OPTC advised the City at that time, no formal approval for a sub-lease was ever requested or provided. In November 2008 the City confirmed with the OPTC that a formal consent from the City was required to the sub-lease and, in addition, that the operation of the child care centre on the Reserve may be a breach of the planning regulations at that time and its existing lease conditions.

At its Ordinary Council Meeting on 24 April 2012, Council resolved:

That: 1. Council support the submission of a development application to the Western Australian Planning Commission by the Onslow Park Tennis Club for the purpose of continuing the operation of a preschool child care service at 98 Onslow Road, Shenton Park.

2. Council support is subject to the sub-lease rental income from the child care centre being placed in a City trust account for future building works to the Onslow Park Tennis Club facility.

CITY OF SUBIACO 37 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

3. Onslow Park Tennis Club remains responsible for statutory and commercial matters in relation to the sub lease arrangement with Smart Start Child Care.

Following Council’s resolution, the City worked with the OPTC to acquire WAPC approval and to change the purpose of the Reserve under management order so that the childcare use could be permitted and a new lease put in place.

In accordance with Council’s resolution dated 24 April 2012, the proposed new lease agreement incorporated a provision that the child care sub-lease income be placed in a separate trust account and used for the purposes of funding building repairs and improvements to the Tennis Cub Pavilion.

At the time of writing this report, the City has been unable to procure the OPTC’s signature to a new lease agreement notwithstanding the OPTC continues to enjoy the benefit of the child care sub-lease income (about $40,000 per annum).

Grounds maintenance The City currently undertakes the maintenance of the grass tennis courts and the OPTC contributes to grounds maintenance fees in accordance with Policy 6.5 Use of Active Recreation Areas, paying 25% of the costs averaged over the last three years.

Costs over the past 3 financial years are as below:

Total cost per annum Average total Average cost per annum contribution over 3 years by OPTC per annum

July 2016– July 2017 – July 2018 – June 2017 June 2018 June 2019

$47,638 $44,794 $36,762 $43,064 $10,766

This covers not only maintenance for the grass courts themselves but also site cleaning, fence repairs, pest and disease treatment, mowing, fertiliser supply and application, turf renovation, top dressing and line marking.

Comment In April 2020, the OPTC provided the City with a written proposal (“Proposal”), proposing that:

1. the City hand over responsibility for the maintenance of the seven grass tennis courts to the OPTC;

2. the OPTC will procure a new turf maintenance contractor. The City will not have any involvement in the appointment of the new turf maintenance contractor (except for helping to draft the contract specifications);

3. the OPTC appointed turf maintenance contractor will undertake all turf works including renovations, pesticide and herbicide treatments, cutting and line marking and will dispose of grass cuttings at a City of Subiaco facility;

CITY OF SUBIACO 38 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

4. the City contribute a capped amount of $35,000 per annum towards the cost of turf maintenance;

5. the City arrange for the installation of a bore at the City’s cost to provide water for the seven grass courts, and that the City maintains the bore and associated equipment on an annual basis;

6. the OPTC appointed turf maintenance contractor to have control of the watering of the grass courts;

7. the City undertake at the City’s expense replacement works for the court fencing to raise the height to 3 metres, replace the gates, install mowing strips and provide horizontal rails to the top and bottom of each fence panel to prevent tennis balls passing through and below the fence;

8. the City undertake at the City’s expense re-surfacing of the four hard courts with an acrylic ‘Plexipave’ or similar coating;

9. the City replace at the City’s expense the drinking water fountain on the hard courts with an alternative that includes a bottle filler, and supplies water at a consistent drinkable temperature and with adequate drainage; and

10. the City:

a. grant the OPTC permission to undertake improvement works to the Tennis Club Pavilion estimated to cost $300,000;

b. approve an application to be lodged with the WAPC for development approval;

c. make a financial commitment of $100,000 towards the cost of the works;

d. support the OPTC’s application for grant funding to the Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund (“CSRFF”) through the Department of Sport and Recreation; and

e. manage the completion of the building works, with the OPTC to provide the services of an architect.

A copy of the Proposal is attached to this report as Attachment 1.

In its Proposal the OPTC also stated that it would be prepared to enter into a new lease agreement with the City, on the following terms:

11. The term of the lease to be 10 years with an option to renew.

12. The lease agreement to include a licence to use and access the adjacent grass and hard tennis courts.

13. 50% of the sub-lease income from Smart Start Child Care to be placed in a restricted account controlled by the City.

CITY OF SUBIACO 39 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

14. The OPTC to only require the City’s approval to withdraw amounts from the restricted account in excess of $20,000 in any one year.

15. Any balance in the restricted account at the end of the lease period to be carried over under the same arrangements and any funds would be available solely for improvements to the Tennis Club Pavilion.

The Proposal is comprehensive, and comprises 15 items.

The City has given due and careful consideration to each item of the Proposal and, following the numbering sequence (1 – 15) referred to above, provides the following comments and makes the following recommendations.

1. The City hand over responsibility for the maintenance of the seven grass tennis courts to the OPTC.

In principle, the City has no objections to the OPTC taking over responsibility for the maintenance of the grass tennis courts (excluding watering). This would include, without limitation, pest and disease treatment, mowing, fertiliser supply and application, turf renovation, top dressing and line marking.

2. The OPTC will procure a new turf maintenance contractor. The City will not have any involvement in the appointment of the new turf maintenance contractor (except for helping to draft the contract specifications).

In principle, the City has no objections to the OPTC tendering for the turf maintenance contract for the grass courts. The City would be happy to review the draft contract specifications and provide feedback.

3. The OPTC appointed turf maintenance contractor will undertake all turf works including renovations, pesticide and herbicide treatments, cutting and line marking and will dispose of grass cuttings at a City of Subiaco facility.

In principle, the City has no objections to the OPTC appointed contractor undertaking the turf works as listed above. However, the City of Subiaco does not have facilities for the disposal of grass clippings. At present, the City pays for the disposal through the WMRC. The City’s suggestion is that, if the OPTC takes on responsibility for turf maintenance, then the disposal of any clippings be included in the OPTC’s own turf maintenance contract.

4. The City contribute a capped amount of $35,000 per annum towards the cost of turf maintenance.

Although the City’s portion of the costs applied under the grounds maintenance fees calculation (above) equates to approximately $35,000 per annum, if the City were to cease these services, it would not save this amount in costs. This is, in part, because a significant portion of the costs are labour costs (i.e. sunk costs) and the City will continue to employ the personnel required, but instead they will be allocated to other tasks. In addition, some equipment that is used on the tennis court maintenance is specialised and only used to maintain the OPTC and the Daglish Tennis Club. The City will need to retain this equipment and the associated costs to maintain the Daglish tennis courts.

CITY OF SUBIACO 40 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Therefore, the City does not support a contribution of $35,000 per annum to the OPTC. This would not be a cost neutral exercise where the City is simply applying savings on grounds maintenance and applying that to the OPTC.

5. The City arrange for the installation of a bore at the City’s cost to provide water for the seven grass courts, and that the City maintains the bore and associated equipment on an annual basis.

The City’s estimated cost for this would be approximately $20,000 for the initial installation and, depending on the equipment and water usage, an approximate cost of $3,500 to $7,000 for maintenance costs over a five year period.

The City currently provides the water for the 7 grass tennis courts under the current water allocation for Rosalie Park and, therefore, does not believe that an additional bore is required.

The City does not support this element of the proposal as the City’s water license cannot support any increase in water usage and breaching the City’s water license could result in significant penalties.

6. The OPTC appointed turf maintenance contractor to have control of the watering of the grass courts.

The Proposal requests that the OPTC’s appointed turf maintenance contractor have control of the watering and, as such, puts the City at risk of breaching its water licence agreement if overwatering occurs.

If the City were to install a bore as requested by the OPTC then the water rights and licensing associated with that bore would be considered to be managed by the City. In order to comply with those restrictions it would not be possible for watering control to be given over to a third party.

However, the City would have no initial objections should the OPTC wish to install and maintain a bore, and the associated water licensing rights, at the OPTC’s expense. In this case, the water usage and associated costs would be the OPTC’s to control. There would be no risk to the City breaching its water licence agreement should overwatering occur.

7. The City undertake at the City’s expense, replacement works for the court fencing to raise the height to 3 metres, replace the gates, install mowing strips and provide horizontal rails to the top and bottom of each fence panel to prevent tennis balls passing through and below the fence.

Whilst it is acknowledged that the fence is in need of repairs, the works as proposed by the OPTC are estimated by the City at a significant cost in excess of $100,000. The additional fence height is not considered a justifiable expense by the City, however, the City recommends replacing the existing fencing to the existing standard (approximately 2.4 metres) at an estimated cost of about $70,000 (subject to FY 2021/22 budget approval).

8. The City undertake at the City’s expense re-surfacing of the four hard courts with an acrylic ‘Plexipave’ or similar coating.

CITY OF SUBIACO 41 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Hard courts 8 and 9 were completed in October 2009 and hard courts 10 and 11 were completed in October 2012.

According to Tennis Australia the average life of a 3-coat acrylic coating system is 9 to 10 years and, therefore, the courts are likely in need of resurfacing.

Cost estimates provided by the OPTC indicate resurfacing would cost in the vicinity of $8000 per court, $32,000 in total.

The City recommends undertaking the resurfacing of the hard tennis courts this financial year.

9. The City replace at the City’s expense the drinking water fountain on the hard courts with an alternative that includes a bottle filler, and supplies water at a consistent drinkable temperature and with adequate drainage.

The City estimates that the cost to replace the existing drinking water fountain is approximately $4,500.

Given that there are no material faults or maintenance issues with the existing drinking water fountain, the City considers that a new drinking water fountain on the hard courts, which meets the OPTC’s requirements, is not an onerous expense, and is something that the OPTC could fund themselves.

10. The City: a. grant the OPTC permission to undertake improvement works to the Tennis Club Pavilion estimated to cost $300,000;

b. approve an application to be lodged with the WAPC for development approval;

c. make a financial commitment of $100,000 towards the cost of the works;

d. support the OPTC’s application for grant funding to the Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund (“CSRFF”) through the Department of Sport and Recreation; and

e. manage the completion of the building works, with the OPTC to provide the services of an architect.

The OPTC proposes that the Tennis Club Pavilion be extended to provide appropriate facilities for young children using the hall; a permanent store to replace the existing shipping container and lighting to courts 4, 5, 6 and 7. This is stage two of the works proposed by the OPTC in 2012, with stage one having already been completed by the City in 2017. The total cost for the stage two works is estimated by the OPTC to be $300,000.

CITY OF SUBIACO 42 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The OPTC has requested a contribution from the City of $100,000 and intend to seek Community Sport and Recreation Facilities Fund (“CSRFF”) grant funding through the Department of Sport and Recreation for a further $100,000. The CSRFF program provides financial assistance to not for profit clubs to develop their infrastructure, with an overall aim of increasing participation. In order to apply for CSRFF grant funding the OPTC will need the City’s approval of the application as the Local Government Authority.

Since at least 2012 the OPTC has advocated for improvement works to both the Tennis Club Pavilion and tennis courts. In 2016/17 the City undertook building refurbishment and upgrade works to the Tennis Club Pavilion at a total cost of $184,160. The OPTC contributed $58,554 and the City funded the remaining $125,606. These works included upgrades to the kitchen, change rooms and toilets including new fixtures and fittings, installation of emergency exit lighting and smoke alarms; upgrades to electrical power outlets and light fittings and replacing termite damaged windows and doors.

The City also needs to consider capital expenditure on all community assets in the context of the needs of the community as a whole and also in accordance with the City’s Strategic Financial Plan and sustainable asset management principles.

The City is required to assess and rank CSRFF applications as part of the application process with the Department of Sport and Recreation. Depending on the time of the application, there may be other competing projects which the City would consider of greater benefit to the broader community than the proposal for improvement works to the OPTC clubrooms. Given the City’s recent contribution to the works already completed at the OPTC and the merit of other projects, it is not recommended to be appropriate or affordable for the City to provide financial support to the OPTC at this time.

In its Proposal the OPTC also stated that it would be prepared to enter into a new lease agreement with the City, on the following terms:

11. The term of the lease to be 10 years with an option to renew. On 24 May 2016, Council adopted the Social Property Policy Framework (“SPPF”) to guide how the City is to manage its social property leases in a consistent and equitable manner (see 24 May 2016 OCM, item T2, a copy of which is available on the City’s website).

Whilst the 10 year term sought by the OPTC differs from the standard 5 year term usually offered to the City’s community tenants under the SPPF it is not unreasonable for the OPTC to seek a longer term, particularly as they would like to undertake investment in capital upgrades.

A five year term with a five year option would provide the City and the OPTC the opportunity to review the terms of the lease after ten years, and provide the OPTC with a reasonable length of tenure.

CITY OF SUBIACO 43 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

12. The lease agreement to include a licence to use and access the adjacent grass and hard tennis courts.

If the OPTC is willing to undertake the maintenance of the tennis courts, it is considered reasonable that the OPTC should have a lease over the Tennis Club Pavilion and a non-exclusive licence to use the courts.

Maintenance for both of these areas can be included as a tenant responsibility in the lease and associated licence.

13. 50% of the sub-lease income from Smart Start Child Care to be placed in a restricted account controlled by the City.

14. The OPTC to only require the City’s approval to withdraw amounts from the restricted account in excess of $20,000 in any one year.

Given the interrelationship between items 13, 14 and 15, they have been considered collectively.

Rather than the City pay a subsidy to the OPTC to manage the maintenance of the tennis courts each year, as proposed in item 4, the City could instead permit the OPTC to retain the income from the sub-lease to the child care provider, which is understood to generate approximately $40,000 per annum. Under this arrangement there would no longer be a requirement for sub-lease income to be placed in a restricted account or trust.

Recommendation Considering items 1 – 15 above holistically and balancing the competing considerations, it is recommended that Council authorise the CEO to: a. hand over responsibility for the maintenance of the grass tennis courts to the OPTC (note: it is envisaged that the lease will include minimum maintenance standards on terms acceptable to the City, with the ability for the City to take back control in the event that the minimum standards are not being met); b. undertake, at the City’s cost, resurfacing of the four hard tennis courts in FY 2020/21; c. undertake, at the City’s cost, upgrades and repairs to the fencing and gates in FY 2021/22 (subject to budget approval); and d. provide a letter of support to any CSRFF application that the OPTC may wish to make during the 3 year period commencing on the date of this report, subject to, and conditional on, the OPTC executing a new lease agreement, on terms acceptable to the City, including that:

i. the term of the lease will be 5 years;

CITY OF SUBIACO 44 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

ii. the OPTC will have 1 x 5 year option to renew the lease; iii. the lease will include a non-exclusive licence to use and access the adjacent tennis courts; iv. the rent will be $3,000 per annum excluding GST;

v. the OPTC will, at its expense, maintain the tennis courts without any financial contribution from the City (note: it is envisaged that the lease will include a provision which requires the OPTC to provide the City with visibility of its financials on an annual basis); and vi. the OPTC will be entitled to all sub-lease income from the childcare (without a requirement that the income be placed in a separate trust account), provided that the sub-lease income is used by the OPTC for the purposes of repairs and maintenance of the OPTC’s facilities and the tennis courts, and otherwise consistent with the SPPF.

The City discussed this recommendation with Elected Members at a Strategic Workshop held Tuesday 25 August 2020. Feedback provided by Elected Members at the Workshop has been incorporated into the recommendation.

Consultation The City did not undertake any community consultation in preparing this report. However, the proposed recommendation was discussed with the President of the OPTC, prior to the report being tabled, for feedback.

Strategic Implications Management of the City's social properties is aligned with the City’s Strategic Community Plan and Corporate Business Plan, with particular reference to the strategies and services below:

Corporate Business Plan – Focus area one – Our sense of community Objective 2 – A diverse, inclusive community where all members enjoy health and wellbeing, a sense of belonging and feel safe.

Strategy 1.2.1 – Facilitate a range of opportunities to foster community health and wellbeing that are accessible and inclusive for everyone.

This includes services that provide support to build the capacity of community organisations to support the community through information provision, workshops, funding and other assistance.

Strategy 1.2.2 – Ensure a range of recreation opportunities for the community.

This includes services to provide and maintain various sporting, recreation and community facilities for use by individuals and groups.

Corporate Business Plan – Focus area six – Council leadership Objective 1 – A leading council that is supported by an excellent organisation.

Strategy 6.1.4 – Ensure best practice asset management principles are adopted.

CITY OF SUBIACO 45 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Statutory and Policy Considerations

Statutory Considerations The City must comply with Section 3.58 of the Local Government Act 1995 when considering leasing land.

Section 3.58 deals with the disposal of property, including by lease.

Under Regulation 30(2)(b) of the Local Government (Functions and General) Regulations 1996 if the disposal (including lease) is to a charitable, recreational, sporting or other similar organisation then the disposition is exempt from the requirements of section 3.58.

The prior approval of the Minister for Lands to the lease / licence is also required to be obtained in accordance with the Land Administration Act 1997.

Policy Considerations The City’s Social Property Policy Framework is the principal guideline for the City in the management of its social properties.

The City’s Use of Active Recreation Areas Policy sets out the current mechanism by which user groups contribute to the costs incurred by the City to maintain sports grounds.

Risk and Asset Implications There is a risk in relinquishing direct responsibility for maintenance of the City’s building and grounds to a third party. This can be mitigated by ensuring adequate reporting and inspection arrangements are contained within the lease and that should the upkeep not be to the City’s satisfaction, there is opportunity to remedy, and indeed take back responsibility should that be required.

Financial Implications Although the City seeks the payment of an annual fee in respect of the properties under social agreements this is in no way intended as a financial strategy or on a direct cost recovery basis. The SPPF proposes fees based on the usage proposed and on the capacity of the organisation to contribute.

In this case, it is proposed that the rent charged to the OPTC be $3,000 per annum exclusive of GST in accordance with the SPPF.

The cost of the works proposed to be undertaken by the City in accordance with the proposed recommendation are likely to cost in the order of $102,000.

Council previously resolved to provide rent relief to its social tenants in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and so the OPTC would not be expected to make any contribution to annual rent until May 2021.

Furthermore, on 21 July 2020, Council resolved that all ground maintenance costs for the January 2020 – June 2020 period be waived for Rosalie Park user groups, including the OPTC.

CITY OF SUBIACO 46 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Social and Environmental Implications The Social Property Policy Framework demonstrates the City's commitment to an organisational and community culture of transparency and fairness.

There are no environmental implications.

Attachments 1. Onslow Park Tennis Club Proposal

CITY OF SUBIACO 47 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

C4 REVIEW OF WARDS AND COUNCILLOR REPRESENTATION*

REPORT FROM DIRECTOR CORPORATE SERVICES Author: Manager Finance and Governance Services, Bianca Jones Date: 8 September 2020 File Reference: A/5497 Voting Requirements: Simple - more than half committee members present required to vote in favour

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Jennings / Seconded Cr Rowe 1. The Review of Ward Boundaries and Councillor Representation Discussion Paper detailed as Attachment 1 for the purposes of public consultation is endorsed. 2. The City of Subiaco gives local public notice of its intention to undertake the review and invite public submissions for a period of 42 days as required by clause 7(1) of Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995. CARRIED 6/5 CRS HAMERSLEY, PHELAN, DAVIS, POWELL AND STROUD VOTED AGAINST 7.53pm

AMENDMENT Moved Cr Nash / Seconded Cr Davis The motion be amended to read as follows: 1. The Review of Ward Boundaries and Councillor Representation Discussion Paper detailed as Attachment 1 for the purposes of public consultation is endorsed, subject to the removal of options pertaining to twelve (12) Councillors from the Discussion Paper, the Brochure and Submission Form attached to this report. 2. The City of Subiaco gives local public notice of its intention to undertake the review and invite public submissions for a period of 42 days as required by clause 7(1) of Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995. LOST 4/7 CRS HAMERSLEY, MCMULLEN, PHELAN, JENNINGS, POWELL, DE VRIES, AND STROUD VOTED AGAINST 7.27pm

Executive Summary  The City of Subiaco received notification from the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries that that the City of Subiaco must undertake a ward and representation review.  At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 18 August 2020 Council considered the draft discussion paper and resolved to redraft the paper and submit it to the September 2020 meeting, including copies of key communication documents and a description of the criteria upon which a recommendation will be based. Council also resolved to request the Department of Local Government to provide a further extension of time to the end of February 2021 to enable Council to make a final decision at its February 2021 meeting. This extension has been approved by the Board.  Community engagement for the review of wards and representation is scheduled to take place between 16 October 2020 and 30 November 2020.

CITY OF SUBIACO 48 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 The purpose of the review is to assess current arrangements due to inequity in representation and determine a system of representation that best suits the characteristics of the City of Subiaco and its community.  The purpose of this report is to endorse the Review of Ward Boundaries and Councillor Representation Discussion Paper, to give local public notice of the review and invite public submissions.

Background Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act) provides that a local government with a ward structure is required to undertake a review of its ward boundaries and the number of Councillors for each ward from time to time, so that not more than eight years elapse between successive reviews.

In 2016, the City of Perth Act 2016 came into effect which caused a change to the City’s boundaries and due to the resignation of an elected member who was no longer eligible to remain a Councillor, created an extraordinary vacancy in the South Ward. Following this, the City conducted a review of its wards and councillor representation in November 2016. Council resolved to recommend a revised four-ward option with twelve Councillors plus the Mayor to the Local Government Advisory Board (“the Board”). The Board provided Council with the opportunity to resubmit another option. At the Ordinary Council meeting held on 28 March 2017, Council resolved not to change their recommendation of twelve Councillors, and the Minister rejected Council’s recommendation. Therefore the City of Subiaco continued with eleven Councillors plus the Mayor.

The City conducted a further review of its wards and representation in 2018. At its meeting on 12 February 2019, Council resolved to inform the Board that Council was unable to agree by an absolute majority on a change to the preferred number of councillors and wards and was therefore unable to make a formal submission on the recommended ward and councillor structure.

The Board considered Council’s position and noted that the Council was unable to come to a unanimous decision in relation to its current ward and representation structure. The Board also noted the disparity in the councillor to elector ratios in the North Ward and in the South Ward. In accordance with clause 6(3) of Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995, the Board requested that the City of Subiaco undertake a further ward and representation review to finalise and submit by October 2020. The City received an extension due to COVID-19 impacts to finalise and submit by 31 January 2021.

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held 17 March 2020, Council resolved to undertake a review of the City of Subiaco’s ward boundaries structure and councillor representation and that a further report on ward options including a discussion paper be presented to Council.

At the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 18 August 2020 Council considered the draft paper titled “Review of Ward Boundaries and Councillor Representation Discussion Paper”. Council resolved the following:

That council direct the Administration to: 1. Redraft the Review of Ward and Boundaries and Elected Members Representation Discussion Paper (the Information Paper) to accurately reflect the legal position in respect of the electors’ rights to propose wards and councillor numbers, identify all

CITY OF SUBIACO 49 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

possibilities in respect of wards and councillors that could meet the statutory requirements of cl 8 of Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995 and identify possibilities considered but identified as being unable to meet those statutory requirements. 2. Provide a further draft of the Information Paper and a report to the council leading to its consideration at the Ordinary Council Meeting to be held in September 2020. 3. Include in the draft report, referred to in 2 above, copies of the key communication documents by which the review is proposed to be locally advertised and any letters, emails, survey document/s and/or other documents that are proposed to be provided or made available to the public on Have Your Say or otherwise. 4. Include in the draft report, referred to in 2 above, a description of the criteria upon which any recommendation, as to the wards and/or councillors that ought to be proposed by the City of Subiaco, will be based. 5. Request the Department of Local Government to provide a further extension of time to the end of February 2021 so that the timetable can be adjusted with a view to a final decision of council being made at its February 2021 meeting. 6. In the event the Department does not afford an extension request the Mayor or elected members to call a special council meeting in very late January to enable the 31 January 2021 deadline to be met.

In accordance with part 5 of this resolution, the City requested the Board to provide a further extension so that that the Council can consider its final decision at its February 2021 meeting. The City has received notification that this request has been approved however the Board has advised that no further extensions can be granted, as the City may potentially be in breach of the Local Government Act 1995.

Comment The City of Subiaco has four wards – North, East, Central, and South with three Councillors for each ward; except for South ward which has two. A ward structure should achieve a balanced ratio of councillors to electors across all wards of a local government district. The percentage to which a ward ratio deviates from the whole local government ratio indicates whether representation is balanced or not. Balanced representation is generally considered to be achieved when the percentage deviation for a ward ratio is within 10% (under or over) of the whole local government district ratio.

The deviation in East Ward is within +/- 10% of the average Representation Ratio for the City. This is generally an acceptable deviation. On the other hand, the underrepresentation in North and Central Wards (where each Councillor represents more electors than the district average) and over-representation in South Ward (where each Councillor represents fewer electors than the district average) is unlikely to be acceptable to the Board.

The Board is established by the Act and is responsible for assessing the ratio of Councillors to electors. The Board considers the deviations in the City’s current representation ratios is significant and prefers deviations of less than plus or minus 10% of the average ratio of Councillors to electors between wards.

The purpose of the review is to assess current arrangements due to inequity in representation and determine a system of representation that best suits the characteristics of the City of Subiaco and its community. As a part of the review, the City may consider any of the following:  Creating new wards;

CITY OF SUBIACO 50 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 Changing the boundaries of a ward;  Abolishing any or all of the wards;  Changing the name of a district or ward;  Changing the number of offices of Councillor; and  Specifying or changing the number of offices of Councillor for a ward.

As part of the review of ward boundaries and councillor representation, the community is invited to consider the appropriateness and effectiveness of the City's current ward system and representation and respond with their preferences and/or suggest an option.

The Department of Local Government has issued a guideline titled “A Guide for Local Governments: How to conduct a review of wards and representation for local governments with and without a ward system”. This guide was developed by the Board to assist local governments when undertaking a review of their wards and representation in accordance with Schedule 2.2 of the Local Government Act 1995 (the Act). The guideline has been used to inform this review process.

To inform the community a Discussion Paper (Attachment 1) has been prepared that outlines the review and includes options for ward boundaries and councillor representation. It generally follows the format suggested in the Guideline.

Relevant Factors for Consideration When considering changes to wards and representation, Schedule 2.2 of the Act specifies that the following factors (Table 1) must be taken into account by a local government as part of the review process:

Table 1: Factors for Consideration under Schedule 2.2  Sense of community identity and belonging, similarities in the characteristics of the residents of a community and similarities in the economic activities.

 Dependence on the shared facilities in an area as reflected in Community of catchment areas of local schools and sporting teams, or the interests circulation areas of local newspapers.

 Neighbourhoods, suburbs and towns are important units in the physical, historical and social infrastructure and often generate a feeling of community and belonging.

 These may be natural or man-made features that will vary from area to area. Water features such as rivers and catchment boundaries may be relevant considerations. Physical and topographic features  Coastal plain and foothills regions, parks and reserves may be relevant as may other man made features such as railway lines and freeways.

 Characteristics of human populations, such as population size, and its distribution by age, sex, occupation and location provide Demographic trends important demographic information.

 Current and projected population characteristics will be relevant

CITY OF SUBIACO 51 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

as well as similarities and differences between areas within the local government.

 Any factor that reflects the character of economic activities and resources in the area.

Economic factors  This may include the industries that occur in a local government area (or the release of land for these) and the distribution of community assets and infrastructure such as road networks.

 The ratio of councillors to electors is particularly significant - it is Ratio of Councillors to expected that each local government will have similar ratios of electors in the various electors to councillors across its wards, generally falling within a wards deviation of plus or minus 10%

These factors are to be considered for each option. If in the Board’s opinion, a proposal from a local government does not consider these factors, it may give notice to the local government to re-consider. If the local government does not comply, the Board may recommend to the Minister the making of orders it thinks would correctly take into account those matters. These factors have been addressed in the Discussion Paper.

Current Structure There is currently an imbalance in the Representation Ratios which are to be addressed in this review (see Table 2). The variables involved in calculating ratios are Councillor and elector numbers.

The Council of the City of Subiaco comprises eleven councillors and a popularly elected Mayor – that is a Mayor elected by the electors, not the councillors. Elector numbers for the district (11,863) have been calculated using the West Australian Electoral Commission roll as at October 2019, and the City’s Owners and Occupiers roll.

Table 2: Current Representation across City of Subiaco wards (based on Local Government Election October 2019)

% Ratio deviation – Number Councillor % Ratio Number of Wards to Ward of to elector deviation within councillors City of electors ratio +/- 10% Subiaco ratio North 3,731 3 1: 1,244 -15.32% No East 3,181 3 1: 1,060 1.68% Yes Central 3,392 3 1: 1,131 -4.84% Yes South 1,559 2 1: 780 27.72% No Total 11,863 11 1: 1,078

Table 2 shows Representation Ratio percentage for each ward and how much it deviates from the average Representation Ratio for the whole of the City of Subiaco (1: 1,078), excluding the Mayor. As shown in the table both the North and South Wards are outside of the acceptable deviation.

Discussion Paper

CITY OF SUBIACO 52 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The discussion paper presented at Attachment 1 provides information as detailed below: a) Outlines the current situation and factors to be considered during this ward review. b) Identifies several possible options (Table 3) that achieve equitable Representation Ratios across the City of Subiaco district to initiate discussion and input in to the ward review.

Table 3: Several possible ward structure options OPTION A No wards with six councillors plus the Mayor

OPTION B No wards with eight councillors plus the Mayor

OPTION C No wards with ten councillors plus the Mayor

OPTION D No wards with twelve councillors plus the Mayor

OPTION E Two wards (East and West) with eight councillors plus the Mayor

OPTION F Two wards (East and West) with twelve councillors plus the Mayor

OPTION G Two wards (North and South) with eight councillors plus the Mayor

OPTION H Two wards (North and South) with twelve councillors plus the Mayor

Three wards (North, East and Central) with six councillors plus the OPTION I Mayor Three wards (North, East and Central) with twelve councillors plus OPTION J the Mayor Redraw boundaries for four wards (North, South, East and Central) OPTION K with eight councillors plus the Mayor Redraw boundaries for four wards (North, South, East and Central) OPTION L with twelve councillors plus the Mayor c) Provides Representation Ratios achieved for each option

Table 4: Representation Ratios for various ward structures and councillor numbers (excluding the Mayor) Total Number of number Representation Option Number of Wards Councillors ratio (per of per ward councillor) councillors A No wards 6 6 1:1,977

B No wards 8 8 1:1,483 C No wards 10 10 1:1,186 D No wards 12 12 1:989 E Two wards (East-West) 4 8 1:1,483

CITY OF SUBIACO 53 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Total Number of number Representation Option Number of Wards Councillors ratio (per of per ward councillor) councillors F Two wards (East-West) 6 12 1:989 G Two wards (North-South) 4 8 1:1,483 H Two wards (North-South) 6 12 1:989 I Three wards 2 6 1:1,977 J Three wards 4 12 1:989 K Four wards 2 8 1:1,483 L Four wards 3 12 1:989 d) Provides consideration of the five factors for consideration as specified in Schedule 2.2 e) Provides detailed information about various ward boundary and representation options for the City of Subiaco.

CITY OF SUBIACO 54 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Ward/Representation Review Process

Public Consultation Process A consultation period of no less than six weeks from the date of the first notice should be advertised. Before conducting a review of wards and representation, the City of Subiaco must give public notice that a review is to be carried out.

The notice must advise that submissions may be made to the City of Subiaco by a date at least 42 days from the date of the first notice (not including the day of the notice).

Community engagement for the review of wards and representation will take place between 16 October 2020 and 30 November 2020. Members of the community will be invited to make a submission regarding the ward boundaries and representation and lodge it via online and hard copy submissions. The online survey will be accessed via Have Your Say Subiaco, and the survey will be managed by Catalyse, an independent research company.

CITY OF SUBIACO 55 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Catalyse has been appointed to manage the engagement process and will provide an independent report of the results at the conclusion of the public consultation process. The process will seek a random sample of residents and ratepayers (invitation by mail and email), and additionally community members are also able to self-nominate to participate (by hard copy and website submission). The random sample will comprise of City of Subiaco residents and businesses.

In addition to the discussion paper, a brochure (Attachment 2) has been developed to provide an overview of the wards and councillor representation review. It includes a brief explanation of the review and provides a complete list of all options detailed in in the discussion paper including maps. This will accompany the submission form (Attachment 3).

The community consultation and invitation to participate will be communicated through local media and the City’s owned channels:

 City of Subiaco website  Have Your Say Subiaco website  Subiaco Scene advertorial  Subiaco Snapshot email newsletter  Business email Newsletter  Children & Families email Newsletter  City of Subiaco Facebook page.

Ward Review Schedule The proposed schedule (Table 5) has been revised to align with the extended submission date provided by the Board in August 2020:

Table 5: Proposed ward review schedule COUNCIL MEETING Tuesday Council resolves to give public notice that a review is to be 22 September 2020 carried out (public consultation) and endorses the discussion paper. 6 weeks 16 October 2020 to 30 PUBLIC CONSULTATION PERIOD November 2020 December 2020 / STRATEGIC WORKSHOP January 2021 Strategic Workshop to present outcomes of public consultation Tuesday COUNCIL MEETING February 2021 Council considers its position and resolves to make a (date to be considered submission to the Board by Council) 28 February 2021 Lodgement of Council’s recommended option to the Board

CITY OF SUBIACO 56 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Consultation A Strategic Workshop was held with Elected Members on 30 July 2020 to provide an overview of the process of the ward review and outline the proposed process. A further strategic workshop will be held with Elected Members after the consultation process to consider the outcomes of the public submissions received.

Strategic Implications Strategic Community Plan Focus Area 6 – Council Leadership Strategy 6.1.1 - The Mayor and councillors provide strong, consistent and decisive leadership.

Statutory and Policy Considerations Schedule 2.2(6)(1) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires the City to review its ward boundaries and councillor representation no later than every eight years between successive reviews. Schedule 2.2(7) of the Local Government Act 1995 requires the City to give a local public notice advising that the review is to be carried out and that submissions may be made to the City.

Risk and Asset Implications The Board requested that the City of Subiaco undertake a ward and representation review to finalise and submit by the extended date of 28 February 2021. Should Council not approve the discussion paper and public consultation period as stated in this report, the City would not be able to meet the submission timeline set by the Board. In granting this extension, the Board has advised that no further extensions can be granted, as the City may potentially be in breach of the Local Government Act 1995.

There is risk that the community may be reluctant to engage due to the last ward and representation review taking place two years ago and leading to no change in wards or representation. The risk will be mitigated by a strong communication strategy and key messaging. In addition, updating the methodology and using a specialist consultant to manage the engagement process will improve the process and aim to alleviate issues experienced in the last review.

Financial Funds were provided through the November 2019 budget review to engage a community consultation specialist and have been carried forward as the consultation process has been impacted by COVID-19.

Social and Environmental Implications There are no specific social or environmental implications for this report.

Attachments 1. Review of Ward Boundaries and Councillor Representation Discussion Paper 2. Review of Ward Boundaries and Councillor Representation Brochure 3. Review of Ward Boundaries and Councillor Representation Submission Form

CITY OF SUBIACO 57 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

C5 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND REPORTS FOR THE MONTH ENDING 31 JULY 2020*

The Presiding Member adjourned the meeting at 7.54pm and reconvened the meeting at 8.04pm.

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Rowe / Seconded Cr Nash That the financial reports for the period ending 31 July 2020, incorporating the following items, be endorsed:  Financial activity statement report.  Balance sheet.  Cash flow statement  Cash backed reserves summary.  Aged trial balance (debtors).  Rates reconciliation and summary.  Summary of cash and investments.  Payments cash book.  Credit Card payment summary. CARRIED 9/2 CRS HAMERSLEY AND STROUD VOTED AGAINST 8.05pm

Executive Summary The purpose of the attached reports is to provide details of the financial activity that has occurred for the period ending each month and a snapshot of the financial position after those transactions have occurred. Any items requiring further explanation are detailed within the agenda report when required. The financial reports presented have been prepared in accordance with the Local Government Act 1995 and the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 and Australian Accounting Standards (to the extent that they are not inconsistent with the Act). The financial reports presented fairly represent, in all material respects, the results of the operations for the month being reported. Officers therefore recommend that Council endorse the monthly financial reports as presented.

Background The monthly financial reports provide an overview of the City’s financial performance. These reports represent a snapshot as at 31 July 2020. These reports do not represent the final financial position for the 30 June 2020 for the City as the end of year financial statements have not yet been audited. The audit of the City of Subiaco financial position will commence in September 2020. Therefore the attached reports represent a snap shot as at the 31 July and a full set of audited financial statements will be presented to Council once the audit is complete.

CITY OF SUBIACO 58 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Budget amounts shown throughout the budget reports are those adopted by Council on 18 August 2020 and have been reflected in the July reporting period based on timing of when the budgeted expenditure was expected to occur.

Comment Financial activity statement report The City’s revenues and expenditures are generally in line with budget expectations except as noted. Revenues and expenditures are detailed in the financial statements attached.

Balance sheet The City has current assets of $68,008,673. The major components of which are; cash and investments of $49,180,794 rates debtors of $878,145 and sundry debtors of $18,613,286 (including Modified Penalties). There are current liabilities totalling $5,669,686 and cash backed reserves of $41,540,684. The City’s net current assets equal $62,339,087 less restricted assets (Reserves) of $41,540,684 resulting in a net current position of $20,798,402 at 31 July 2020.

Cash flow statement Net cash provided by operating activities is ($17,674,337) for the period to date. This relates to the proceeds on sale of investment property which has been raised as a debtor during the month of July with funds received in August. The net cash used in financing activities is ($44,376). Overall the cash flow statement shows that the City is well placed to meet its budgeted obligations.

Cash backed reserves summary The closing balance of cash backed reserves is $41,540,684. The reserve summary shows all movements to and from reserve to achieve the expected closing balance. The report provides information on the City’s ability to allocate funds for future projects by providing a closing balance comparison to budget. Reserve movements are reconciled and adjusted in December and June each year and where major movements are planned, adjustments are also made to reserves in that period. Reserve adjustments for June were not finalised at the time of preparing this report and will be completed as part of the City’s year end preparation.

Aged trial balance (debtors) The report provides a listing of outstanding debts payable to the City of Subiaco. The balance of debts outstanding at 31 July is $18,613,286. This includes an invoice raised by the City for the sale of investment property which settlement occurred in July.

All debts that have been paid after the end of month have been highlighted on the attached report. Payments of $16,868,760 were received after 31 July (including settlement proceeds on sale of property), reducing the balance of debts outstanding to $1,744,526 at the time of preparing the debtors report.

The outstanding balance for Home Base Management relates to rent. City officers are liaising with Homebase on payment of this amount.

Cooper and Oxley Builders Pty Ltd vacated the premises on 31st October 2018 and the outstanding balance relates to rent and annual rates. Cooper and Oxley Builders Pty Ltd are currently in the process of Administration and the City is listed as an unsecured creditor. Officers are liaising with the appointed administrators in relation to the debt.

CITY OF SUBIACO 59 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The outstanding amount by Newbishop Pty Ltd relates to overdue rental payments. City officers are working towards an agreement with Newbishop to finalise their outstanding amounts. The outstanding balance by Timber Holdings Pty Ltd relates to unpaid rent. The tenant vacated the property in January 2019 following agreement with the City to terminate the lease. Since this time no repayment of funds have been received in accordance with the January 2019 agreement. A specialised debt management agency has now been engaged to pursue the outstanding amount. The City will consider legal action including options to pursue the matter through the courts and the likelihood of success. Separate advice on this matter will be presented to Council once the legal advice has been finalised.

Rates reconciliation summary Total rates, Fire & Emergency Services levy, and waste service charges have not yet been levied for the 2020-21 financial year as the budget was only adopted by Council in August. The payments received to date total $79,078. A reconciliation of the rates and waste service charges is included in the attachments. These payments and reductions resulted in a balance outstanding for rates and waste service charges (excluding rates not yet levied) of $972,031 (including Deferred Pensioner Rates).

Summary of cash and investments The City currently holds financial investments of $50,040,684.

The City’s investment policy operates with a view to maximising income and capital growth in relation to liquid assets. For short term liquid investment assets the policy requires that no more than 30% is to be invested with any one institution at the time of investment. The table below shows the percentage of investments held with each institution at reporting date.

Total Investment Total Investment Institution (Municipal) (Reserves) Total Investment % Fossil Fuels ANZ 3,000,000 5,000,000 8,000,000 16% Invested Bankwest - - - 0% Invested Bendigo - 9,252,413 9,252,413 18% Divested CBA - 12,106,424 12,106,424 24% Invested NAB 5,500,000 5,872,881 11,372,881 23% Invested Suncorp - 9,308,967 9,308,967 19% Divested 8,500,000 41,540,684 50,040,684 100%

The policy also sets the requirement of a minimum A-2 rating for any institutions the City invests in short term bank deposits and bank bills. The table below shows the current value of investments held at each credit rating permitted by the policy.

Standard & Poors Short-Term Issue Credit Ratings Total %

A-1 9,308,967 A-1+ 31,479,304 A-1- - 40,788,272 82% A-2 9,252,413 A-2+ - A-2- - 9,252,413 18% 50,040,684 100%

CITY OF SUBIACO 60 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

The table below shows the current investment in fossil fuel divested institutions.

Fossil Fuel Total %

Invested 31,479,304 63% Divested 18,561,380 37%

50,040,684 100%

A summary of the cash and investments holdings is included in the attachments.

Payment to creditors Payment from the City’s accounts for the period totalled $4,099,166 Cheques were drawn and electronic fund transfers processed to the value of $3,116,295 from the municipal fund $17,113 from the trust fund for payment of creditors. Employee payments, made via electronic funds transfer totalled $965,758 for the period. Payment details for the month are contained in the payments cash book and credit card payments summary attached.

Credit card payment summary Payment for purchases made by the City using the City’s corporate credit cards totalled $10,184. A reconciliation of the credit card transactions is included in the attachments.

Consultation Public consultation was not relevant to the development of this report.

Strategic Implications The City’s financial reporting contributes to achievement of the Strategic Plan aim relating to responsible stewardship: “To manage the community’s resources in the best long-term interests of all.”

Statutory and Policy Considerations The Local Government Act 1995 and the Local Government (Financial Management) Regulations 1996 require a local government to prepare monthly financial reports. The reports are prepared based on the following statutory and policy considerations. (1) Form of financial activity statement report — s. 6.4(2) and Reg 34 (2) Payments from municipal fund or trust fund— s. 6.10(12) (13) (3) Trustees Act 1962 (Part III) (4) The City’s investment asset policy.

Risk and Asset Implications A statement of financial activity and accompanying documents as set out in sub regulation (2) are to be presented at an ordinary meeting of the Council and recorded in the minutes of the meeting at which it is presented. If this report and its attachments are not endorsed then the City will be in breach of the Local Government Act and associated regulations.

CITY OF SUBIACO 61 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Financial The attachments show that the City’s financial performance for 2020/2021 is essentially in line with budget expectations.

Social and Environmental Implications There are no specific social or environmental implications of this report.

Attachments 1. Financial activity statement report (2 pages) 2. Balance Sheet (2 pages) 3. Cash Flow Statement (2 pages) 4. Cash backed reserves summary (1 page) 5. Aged trial balance (debtors) (2 pages) 6. Rates reconciliation and summary (1 page) 7. Summary of cash and investments (2 pages) 8. Payments cash book and schedule of accounts July 2020 (46 pages) 9. Credit Card payment summary July 2020 (1 page)

CITY OF SUBIACO 62 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

C6 MATTERS FOR INFORMATION*

REPORT FROM CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER Author: Executive Assistant, Diane Scott Date: 8 September 2020 File Reference: A/5497 Voting Requirements: Simple - more than half elected members present required to vote in favour

OFFICER RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL DECISION Moved Cr Davis / Seconded Cr Rowe That Council receive the information in this report. CARRIED EN BLOC 11/0 6.21pm

Background The City of Subiaco regularly receives and produces information for receipt by the Elected Members.

At the Ordinary Council Meeting on 8 October 2019 Council resolved to include updates on the Subiaco East project in the agenda for each Ordinary Council Meeting instead of the attachment provided in the Matters for Information report.

The purpose of this item is to keep Elected Members informed on the progress of the Subiaco East project and other items for information received by the City.

Subiaco East Update  The draft Subi East Master Plan for has been released for public comment by DevelopmentWA. Elected Members were given a presentation by DevelopmentWA on 2 July 2020, with Officers holding a Strategic Workshop with Elected Members on 4 August 2020. Council is considering the draft Subi East Master Plan at its Ordinary Council Meeting of 22 September 2020.  Development Application referral from DevelopmentWA for six temporary hard (playing) courts was received by the City on 25 August 2020. The City has until 21 October 2020 to provide its comments to DevelopmentWA and the proposal will be presented to Council for consideration at its Ordinary Council Meeting of 20 October 2020.  Development Application for Bob Hawke College Stage 2 was considered by Council at its Council Meeting of 21 July 2020 (Item 2). Council resolved to support the proposal subject to a range of matters being addressed prior to determination and recommended conditions and advice notes to consider should DevelopmentWA approve the development.  The City will continue to work with the Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage and West Australian Football Commission to progress the shared user agreement for Subiaco Oval following in principle support by Council on 7 July 2020.

Reports The following reports are presented to Council at the Ordinary Council meeting of 22 September 2020: 1. Planning Services Monthly Report – July and August 2020 2. Building Services and Environmental Health Monthly Statistics - July and August 2020 3. Website and Facebook Statistics – 27 July to 27 August 2020

CITY OF SUBIACO 63 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

Consultation No community consultation was considered necessary in relation to the recommendation of this report.

Strategic Implications There are no strategic implications for this report.

Statutory and Policy Considerations There are no statutory or policy implications for this report.

Risk and Asset Implications There are no risk and asset implications for this report.

Financial There are no financial implications for this report.

Social and Environmental Implications There are no social or environmental implications for this report.

Attachments 1. Planning Services Monthly Report – July and August 2020 2. Building Services and Environmental Health Monthly Statistics - July and August 2020 3. Website and Facebook Statistics – 27 July to 27 August 2020

CITY OF SUBIACO 64 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

11. ELECTED MEMBERS’ MOTIONS OF WHICH PREVIOUS NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

11.1 SWINGS AND HOOPS

Submitted by: Mayor Penny Taylor Date: 7 September 2020 Voting requirements: Simple - more than half elected members present required to vote in favour

COUNCIL DECISION 1. That the Council requests a report to the December 2020 Ordinary Council Meeting on the current status of verge policies and laneway policies relating to play equipment, such as swings and basketball hoops.

2. Council requests a review of the Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law 2014.

3. In relation to points 1 and 2 above: a. Council would like to see what discretion can be applied to the City of Subiaco local laws regarding children’s activities on verges and lane ways to facilitate safe playfulness and community enjoyment of such spaces b. Please also review what the City of Vincent has done in this regard to see what could be applicable for the City of Subiaco. CARRIED 11/0 8.42pm

ELECTED MEMBERS’ MOTION Moved Mayor Taylor / Seconded Cr Stroud 1. That the Council requests a report to the December 2020 Ordinary Council Meeting on the current status of verge policies and laneway policies relating to play equipment, such as swings and basketball hoops.

2. Council requests a review of the Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law 2014.

4. In the meantime, please apply discretion in an appropriate fashion that would see the recent spate of infringements issued regarding children play equipment put on hold pending this report to Council.

Pursuant to clause 6.5 of the City of Subiaco Meeting Procedures Local Law, the Presiding Member allowed points 1, 2 and 3 of the motion to be voted on separately to point 4.

CITY OF SUBIACO 65 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

MOTION 1 1. That the Council requests a report to the December 2020 Ordinary Council Meeting on the current status of verge policies and laneway policies relating to play equipment, such as swings and basketball hoops.

2. Council requests a review of the Activities in Thoroughfares and Public Places Local Law 2014.

MOTION 2 4. In the meantime, please apply discretion in an appropriate fashion that would see the recent spate of infringements issued regarding children play equipment put on hold pending this report to Council. LOST 3/8 CRS HAMERSLEY, PHELAN, MCMULLEN, JENNINGS, ROWE, POWELL, DE VRIES AND STROUD VOTED AGAINST 8.43pm

Reasons: Common sense.

Please see Miss Odette’s Letter. 1. Kids have fun on them. 2. It builds community in our street 3. No one has hurt themselves (very badly) on our swings. 4. We put rainbows around them so they look nice.

Officer Comment The Elected Members Motion is supported in part.

Existing verge and laneway policies are developed from the City’s local laws and cannot override the requirements within a local law. The current verge management guidelines reflect the Activities and Thoroughfares Local Law 2014 and do not allow play equipment to be installed, the local law needs to be changed before the guidelines are reviewed. Therefore a report on the policies by December will be of little benefit.

A review of the Activities and Thoroughfares Local Law 2014 is supported and as part of the review, consideration can be given to how children’s activities on verges and in laneways could be incorporated in the Local Law.

The Activities and Thoroughfares Local Law 2014 does not allow any discretion and until such time the Local Law is changed the installation of play equipment and basketball hoops is not permitted.

CITY OF SUBIACO 66 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

11.2 OPEN SPORT SPACE AT SUBI OVAL

Submitted by: Cr Stephanie Stroud Date: 10 September 2020 Voting requirements: Simple - more than half elected members present required to vote in favour

ELECTED MEMBERS’ MOTION Moved Cr Stroud / Seconded Cr Phelan That the City writes to the WAFC (Chair and commissioners) and explains the serious shortfall of active open sport space for Subiaco's growing population, and in turn requests the WAFC to reconsider their use of Subiaco Oval. This letter should include a copy of the Council resolution with the reasons, the Cardno Report and any other relevant documentation and information. LOST 3/8 MAYOR TAYLOR AND CRS HAMERSLEY, MCMULLEN, NASH, DAVIS, ROWE, POWELL AND DE VRIES VOTED AGAINST 9.00pm

Reasons:  DevWA have not included 1.73 hectares of open active space additional to Subiaco Oval in the Subi East precinct planning. Therefore the only available sports space is Subiaco Oval. However, the current proposal is for the oval to be shared with Bob Hawke College (BHC) and West Australian Football Commission (WAFC).  The Cardno Report- Future Requirements for Sports Space, Subiaco (Nov 2016) after detailed consideration of the current and future demand for sport space within Subiaco, recommended that public sporting space needed to be increased from 7.18ha to 14.76ha by 2036 to meet Subiaco’s growing population estimate of 22,710. To quote from the executive summary: "Urban consolidation, population growth, climate change, declining private open space, a growing concern for the public health costs of inactivity, as well as recent advances in the status of women’s sport that are leading to higher levels of participation, are combining to place greater demand on existing sports space.”  The Cardno report was written before any consideration of BHC with 2,000 students and the provision of only one oval! BHC will require exclusive weekday use between 7.30-4.30pm during school term. (C1 OCM 7/7/20) Maintenance is preferred outside of those times.  Curtin University 2013 study - Active Open Space (playing fields) in a growing Perth-Peel recommended a guideline of 6.5m2 sport space (=actual playing surface) per resident in urban infill and higher density areas. Based on the 2016 population estimate of 17,325, and post City of Perth Act, Subiaco has the equivalent of only 4.5m2 per resident. While the inclusion of Subiaco Oval (approx 1.97ha) increases the space to 5.6m2, this still falls short of the recommendation, and represents a significant shortfall of only 4.3m2 (as against Cardno recommendation 14.76m2) by 2035. Subiaco Oval is further compromised by the proposed shared use of BHC (2,000 students) and WAFC.  The reality of 3 senior colleges (Perth Modern*, BHC and Shenton College) as well as 3 full primary schools Rosalie Park, Subiaco and Jolimont within the environs of Subiaco is clear evidence of the potential demands for junior sport, in addition to senior sporting codes. *Perth Modern’s shortage of playing fields means they have to transport students to other locations.

CITY OF SUBIACO 67 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

 There is no other opportunity to redress the increasingly problematic shortage of sport space than Subiaco Oval and the original 1.73ha that was Kitchener Park.  Current proposals of use of Subi oval include BHC weekdays from 8am-4pm; and WAFC (peak season) of 4 week nights to 9pm as well as Saturday mornings.  The proposed high rise development of Subi East precinct (2,400 dwellings, 4,000+ residents) and additional developments such as Subiaco One and West Leederville LDP, will further increase the need for recreational space. 2013-14 ABS data indicates that 63% of WA adult population participate in sport and physical recreation. National average is 60.2%  Rosalie Park (13.10ha) is the City’s primary sport space. Operating at full capacity, it is the the home ground for: Western Suburbs Cricket Club; Subiaco AFC (juniors); Subiaco AFC (Seniors); Subiaco Lacrosse Club; Rosalie Touch Association; Subiaco Junior Football Club and Onslow Park Tennis Club. (Due to lack of space Rugby relocated to another suburb). Rosalie is used for both fixtures and training. Maintenance problems can ensue from overuse, and there are also important considerations of water allocation in a drying climate. The staff report from C1 - “Subiaco Oval Shared User Agreement" (OCM 7 July’20) recognises that the relocation of Subiaco Junior Football Club (SFJC) to Subiaco Oval will alleviate pressure on Rosalie playing fields. However this relocation is only plausible if appropriate timings of use are allocated from WAFC. SFJC’s requirements include training for 9 teams starting at 5pm and Sunday match days for 11 teams (approx 8-9 hours)  The City has the suitable skills and experience to manage playing fields including Subiaco Oval. Maintenance costs are expected to be apportioned to impact of users.  Consultation by Cardno with neighbouring local governments revealed their concern for a shortage of sports space to meet anticipated increases in population and demand from urban infill.  While the City may have started negotiations over the shared use of Subiaco Oval, it is not too late to approach WAFC at the higher level. Apparently WAFC are considering all options including the WACA and a letter from the City outlining all the the issues and concerns will help promote discussion and consideration.

Officer Comment The elected members’ motion is not supported.

The West Australian Football Commission (WAFC) has not advised the City of Subiaco of its intentions to not use Subiaco Oval in accordance with the loan payment, property transfer, accommodation assistance and surrender of lease deed between the State Government and WAFC dated 06 June 2019.

The City of Subiaco has been in negotiations with the Department of Education and WAFC regarding the shared user agreement for Subiaco Oval and at its July 2020 Ordinary Council Meeting, Council resolved in-principle support for the draft allocation of hours and maintenance costs.

1. The City of Subiaco’s draft allocation of hours for Subiaco Oval (Tables 1 and 2) is supported in principle, subject to the State Government considering the extension of the City’s Tuesday allocation in the peak season to 18:00.

CITY OF SUBIACO 68 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

2. The City of Subiaco’s draft allocation of maintenance costs (Table 3) is supported in-principle. 3. The Chief Executive Officer is requested to: a. progress a final draft of Shared User Agreement in negotiation with the relevant parties in accordance with the in-principle support of the draft allocation of hours and maintenance costs; and b. present the final Shared User Agreement to Council for consideration in due course.

The elected members’ motion may jeopardise negotiations and is inconsistent with Council’s recent resolution (above).

The City has not received any notification that the WAFC is seeking alternative facilities and the City must continue to negotiate in good faith. At this stage it is likely that the City will only receive the management order for Subiaco Oval once the shared user agreement is finalised between the City, WAFC and the Department of Education.

CITY OF SUBIACO 69 22 SEPTEMBER 2020 MINUTES – ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING

12. NEW BUSINESS OF AN URGENT NATURE APPROVED BY THE PERSON PRESIDING OR BY A DECISION OF THE MEETING

Nil

13. MEETING CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC

PROCEDURAL MOTION (7.1(h) of the Meeting Procedures Local Law) Moved Cr Rowe / Seconded Cr Hamersley That the Meeting be closed to the public, pursuant to section 5.23(2)(c), (d) and (e)(iii) of the Local Government Act 1995 while item 13.1 is considered. CARRIED 11/0 9.02pm

Reasons:  Section 5.23(2)(c) provides that a meeting may be closed to deal with a contract entered into, or which may be entered into, by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting.  Section 5.23(2)(d) provides that a meeting may be closed to deal with legal advice obtained, or which may be obtained, by the local government and which relates to a matter to be discussed at the meeting.  Section 5.23(2)(e)(iii) provides that a meeting may be closed to deal with a matter that if disclosed, would reveal information about the business, professional, commercial or financial affairs of a person.  It is recommended that the meeting proceed behind closed doors to discuss the report, which contains information in relation to lease agreements between the City and tenants of City property and information that relates to the business, commercial and financial interests of those tenants.

13.1 COMMERCIAL PROPERTY MATTER – CONFIDENTIAL*

COUNCIL DECISION Council endorses the officer recommendation contained within this confidential report. CARRIED

COUNCIL DECISION That the meeting come out from behind closed doors. CARRIED

14. CLOSURE OF MEETING

The Presiding Member declared the Ordinary Council Meeting of 22 September 2020 closed at 9.28pm.

CITY OF SUBIACO 70